Ae 
TSS . 


AN Yo 


io 


SA 
SN 
SA 
AQ 
RN S 
SENN 
Sy, 
REN 


SANSA 
SS RN 


S 


- 
SS 





THE UNIVERSITY 
OF ILLINOIS . 
LIBRARY 


* 
de ae . . 
ears ¢f wa a 


ESE 


ie! ae aie | 


Return this book on or before the 
_ Latest Date stamped below. A 
| charge is made on all overdue 
| books. 
| U. of I. Library 


AUG 20°36! | 


ad ft} 4 OY ry 


bi y ada 


ed 


| 
JUN 410 lose 





9324-S 


APR 24 1940 
| 
| 


aut 
a 


a 





‘ me 

A EA a 

hi iy Ta iN iH 
ND, My ys Hh 


ine 


si yany ity 





See Pa 


1 





THE LIFE AND TEACHING 
OF JESUS 


e Oc 


THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
NEW YORK - BOSTON : CHICAGO + DALLAS 
ATLANTA * SAN FRANCISCO 


MACMILLAN & CO., Liurtrep 
LONDON * BOMBAY + CALCUTTA 
MELBOURNE 


THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Lop. 
TORONTO 


THE LIFE AND 
TEACHING OF JESUS 


According to the First Three Gospels 


BY 
EDWARD INCREASE BOSWORTH 


NEW TESTAMENT PROFESSOR IN THE OBERLIN 
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY 


jew Pork 
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
1926 


Ali righta reserved 


CopyricHt, 1924, 
Br THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. 





Set up and printed. 


Published March, 1924. 
Reprinted November, 1924. 


Reissued September, 1926. 


Printed in the United States of America by 
WYNKOOP HALLENBECK CRAWFORD CO., NEW YORK 


BS DTM LA, 


Gerorat 23 Yo 27 "iat eean. 


To tHE Memory or 
MY MOTHER 


cw 
Ant 


7) Brae Rw ns ah OH 
ee ana. a tihbedi 
airy, ka af 


; ' 


‘ f LT ae TeV ASL 
hy alee 


i 





FOREWORD 


At the center of the Christian religion stands a person, 
whose name is more and more on the lips of all men 
either in cursing or blessing. If the religious motive 
is to press with new power on the huge masses of men 
now crowded so closely, and sometimes so fiercely, upon 
each other, there must be many attempts made to gain 
a fresh view of this central figure. As each of these 
various attempts is followed by some measure of success, 
a new measure of the energy of the underlying, vitaliz- 
ing will of God will rise in the hearts of men for this 
day of their great endeavor. It has been so before in 
the history of the Christian centuries: “(Wherever Chris- 
tianity has struck out a new path in her journey it has 
been because the personality of Jesus had again become 
living and a ray from its Being had once more illumined 
the world.” 

It is for this reason that the present book is added 
to the many “Lives” of Jesus that have been written and 
that ought in still larger numbers to be written. It will 
endeavor to present the life of Jesus in the terms of a 
real religious experience. The author just quoted has 
also said that “in no other religion has a personality ever 
won a significance in any way approaching that of Christ’s 
in the Christian religion.”1 This unique significance 
seems to be due to Jesus’ profound religious experience. 
This personal experience of Jesus, with all that it in- 


* Bousset, What is Religion, pp. 237, 238. 
ns | 


Vill FoREWORD 


volves, is the world’s most valuable asset. It furnishes 
ground for the kind of authority that modern men most 
readily recognize, authority based on experience, the au- 
thority of “the man who knows” because he has had 
experience. Jesus seemed conscious of possessing such 
authority. It will become evident that a part of his 
religious experience consisted in the feeling that he was 
being made by God personally responsible for leadership 
in the religious life of man, that he could and must “‘save” 
men by leading them to share his own religious experi- 
ence. 

It was inevitable that Jesus’ religious experience should 
be described in the various terms available for this pur- 
pose in his day. This necessity must have been felt not 
only by the followers of Jesus but by Jesus himself. He 
had to give an account of himself to himself in the terms 
of his own thought world. It is only as we in some 
measure penetrate the real religious experience back of 
these terms that we shall feel the power of Jesus’ per- 
sonality in this day of the world’s great need. When 
this is done men have a chance to decide whether they 
really care to follow his leadership and share his experi- 
ence. 

In the providence of God at this time of the world’s 
great need of the religion of Jesus Christ, there are avail- 
able for a study of his life the results of more than a 
century of devout critical scholarship. This book, 
planned by the editor of the series for college students, 
but written also for all of similar outlook on life, should 
show a teacher’s familiarity with these results although 
technical discussions will not often appear. 

The presentation is based chiefly upon the first three 
Gospels, with only occasional references to the Fourth 
Gospel, because the constant use of that Gospel would 


ForEworpD ix 


involve a discussion of critical questions impossible 
within the scope of this book. The author has been will- 
ing to make this limitation because the conclusions reached 
on the basis of the first three Gospels do not seem to him 
vitally different from those presented in the Gospel of 
John. | 

Discussions regarding dates, contemporary history and © 
geography are not introduced inasmuch as they will ap- 
pear in another volume belonging to the series to which 
this book belongs. 


; oh fe 
| ao 


on sa 


Urge oy 
i ‘ine 
naa i i 
er 


wy as ae tha ‘ i 
fie? ne a 


aa ioe ie Tike: 


Vie 
faethe 
ies it 





CONTENTS 


OHAPTER 
I Tue Sources: THe Earuiest GospEL MAKERS 
AND LE RIR LIMES Oy) Wer Gatien te lee! "bigtiile 


Il Tue Sources (Concluded): Tue Four 
CRORPEES Tmsnitia toe heey a heiwaas tedhive ih Gunes 


III Revicion my PAestine as Jesus Founp It; 
Bumprnes anp Sects... ... .~ 


IV Reticton In PALESTINE Aas JESUS Founp It 
(Concluded): THe Kincpom or Gop anp 
THe Messianic Hope... ..« « e 


WES SESUSSIN CRIVATE LIFE.) ce 6 ee ee 
VI Jesus’ Intropuction to Pusuic Lire. . . 
VII Tue Periop oF Dirricutt Decision .. . 


VIII Jesus THE GREATER SUCCESSOR OF THE 
PrRopHET JOHN: Famous PROPHET AND 
HEALER THROUGHOUT GALILEE .. . 


IX Jesus THE GREATER SUCCESSOR OF THE 
Propoet JoHN (Concluded): TEACHER 
AND PrRopHET RATHER THAN HEALER . . 


X JxEsus’ CoNFLICT WITH THE Scripes: THE 
FORGIVENESS OF Sins AND INTIMACY WITH 
SINNERS e e e ° e se e . e 


XI Jesus’ ConFiicr witH THE Scrispes (Con- 
tinued): Fasts aND THE SABBATH. . . 


XII Jesus’ Conruict with THE Scripes (Con- 
cluded): VERDICT OF THE JERUSALEM 
Scripes AND JESUS’ ATTACK ON TRADITION 

... xi 


PAGE 


10 


23 


38 
49 
60 
70 


81 


91 


98 


107 


116 


ConTENTS 


Four WonpDerFUL Works: 
Farrn. 


THe Power or 


e e e e e e e 


EXTENSION OF THE MovVEMENT IN GALILEE 
THROUGH TRAINED ASSISTANTS 


Jesus’ TEACHING ABOUT READINESS FOR THE 
Comine Kinepom 


JESUS’ TEACHING ABOUT READINESS FOR THE 
Cominc Kirncpom (Continued) . .. . 


Jesus’ TEACHING ABOUT READINESS FOR THE 
Cominc Kinepom (Concluded) . . . © 


Jesus’ Estimate or His Work IN GALILEE: 
PARABLES OF THE KINGDOM 


Tue GALILEAN PROPHET AND THE PEOPLE Eat 
ToGETHER BrerorE THE HEAVENLY FATHER 


MISCELLANEOUS REMINISCENCES OF JESUS IN 
THE Reaion NortH anp East or GALILEE 


THE MEsSIANIO SECRET 


e e e e 


THE Prospective SUFFERING OF THE SON OF 
Man e e ° s e e e 


How anp WHEN JEsus EXPECTED THE KING- 
pom or Gop to CoME 


BEGINNING TO WALK ALONE IN THE WAY OF 
Paw . 


Secret JourNEY TurouGcH GALILEE; Poritics 
AMONG THE TWELVE 


In THE BorDERLAND OF JUDAEA AND PERAEA; 
Jesus Resumes Pusiic TEACHING 


° 


In THE BorDERLAND OF JUDAEA AND PERAEA 
(Concluded): STARTING FoR JERUSALEM 


Wuat Dp MessiansHip Mean To JESUS? . 


289 


CHAPTER 


XXIX 


xxx 


XXXI 
XXXII 


XX XIII 
XXXIV 
XXXV 
XXXVI 
XXXVII 
XXXVITTI 


ConTENTS 


Jesus IN COLLISION WITH THE FRIEsTs: 
Priests AND Sorrses CoMBINE 


ConTINUED CONFLICT WITH THE JERUSALEM 
PRIESTS AND SCRIBES . 


JESUS DENOUNCES THE JERUSALEM SCRIBES 


Jesus’ Private TrEAcHtInc ABOUT THE Dkr- 
STRUCTION OF JEHOVAH’s HovusE AND THE 
SDV OR vTHe AE scl ur eee Ohman eg 


Tue TREACHERY OF A TABLE COMPANION. . 
Jesus’ Last SUPPER WITH THE TWELVE ‘. 
JESUS ARRESTED IN THE Ori Press GARDEN . 
CHESLRIAT, OF eh ESUS aie eu is PA eee 

Tue Execution or Jesus . . . . . - 


THE RESURRECTION UF JESUS . .... 


Xili 
PAaGR 


308 


320 
329 


837 
849 
355 
865 
374 
384 
395 


: vy oc ; 
hy abe ‘ 


i 


ii Os 
es vs | 





THE LIFE AND TEACHING 
OF JESUS 





THE LIFE AND 
TEACHING OF JESUS. 


CHAPTER I 


THE SOURCES; THE EARLIEST GOSPEL 
MAKERS AND THEIR TIMES 


HE earliest writings in which the name of Jesus 
appears are those of the most famous missionary 
propagator of the Christian movement, the Jewish 

Rabbi Saul of Tarsus and Jerusalem, who soon after the 
death of Jesus became the Christian apostle Paul. He 
was a homeless traveler on land and sea who wished only 
at. any sacrifice of personal comfort to win converts to 
the movement and in God’s good time to be “at home 
with the Lord.” + Paul’s letters to Christian churches 
and leaders during a period of less than twenty years, 
beginning about 48 A.D., contain a few casual allusions 
to details in the life and teaching of Jesus? but afford 
no important biographical information not contained in 
the Gospels. The letters do give valuable information 
regarding the dominant ideas under the influence of which 
the Gospel material was gathered and shaped into its 
present form. 

The main source of information is the four ‘“Gospels,” 

*II Cor. XI:23-28, V:6-7. 


7£.g., Rom. 1:3, I Cor. VII:10-11, XI:23-25, II Cor. VIII:9. 
1 


2 Tur Lire AND TEACHING oF JESUS 


the survivors of many other attempts at Gospel making 
during the decades immediately following the death of 
Jesus.2 These documents came in the course of time 
to be called “Gospels” because they were presentations 
of “The Gospel’; that is, “The Evangel,” or “The Good 
News” regarding God’s purpose to bring in a new era 
for man through Jesus. There were various versions of 
this message “according to” one or another of those who 
undertook to make Gospels; e.g., ‘“The Gospel according 
to Mark.” 

Jesus himself, like the great Greek teacher in the Uni- 
versity of the Streets of Athens, left no written word 
behind him. “The Gospels,” though not “The Gospel,” 
were the product of the wonderful life that throbbed in 
the hearts of the followers of Jesus after his death. For 
more than a century scholars have been trying to repro- 
duce the situation in which the Gospels were made, and 
especially to account for the perplexing combination of 
similarity and dissimilarity which characterizes the three 
Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, and Luke. This 
is the “synoptic problem.” * These Gospels contain nar- 
rative matter, anecdotes briefly told but possessed of the 
wonderful interest which the oriental story teller knows 
how to impart to a brief narrative. They also contain 
compact, terse, vivid presentations of the “teaching” of 
Jesus, for Jesus, as will be seen, had exercised the func- 
tion of a teaching rabbi, although without the conven- 
tional preparation for it. A rabbi was accustomed to 
“sit down” in the midst of his “disciples” and “teach,” 
or lecture to them: Jesus “went up into the mountain 

* Lk. I:1-4. 

*The first three Gospels have long been called the “Synoptic Gos- 
pels,” perhaps because they yield practically the same synopsis, or 


general view, of the life of Jesus when their contents are arranged 
for the purpose of comparison. 


Gospzt Makers aNnp Tuerr Times 3 


and when he had sat down his disciples came unto him 
and he opened his mouth and taught them.” ° The teach- 
ing matter and the narrative matter may be considered 
separately in discussing the Gospel making process. 

The teaching matter was subject to two general ten- 
dencies during this process, one calculated to preserve 
the exact form in which it had come from Jesus’ lips and 
the other calculated to modify it. The disciple of a 
teaching rabbi was trained to remember the exact words 
of his teacher with reference to passing them on to 
others. A successful, clear-headed rabbi would put his 
teaching in such compact, vivid, concrete form that the 
disciples could “hold it fast.”® Rabbi Johanan, a con- 
temporary of Jesus, said of one of his best disciples, 
Eliezer, that he was “a plastered cistern which loseth not 
a drop.”7 The Jewish Talmud was long preserved in 
the powerful memories of generations of disciples. Its 
earlier portions were not put in written form until the 
third century A.D. Possibly some disciples made tem- 
porary use of written notes taken at the time of the 
lecture, but this evidence of weakness may well have 
been considered with the same disfavor that Elspeth 
Macfadyen, the “sermon taster” of Drumtochty, felt for 
note taking in sermon time. The teaching of Jesus that 
has come down to us shows him to have been a most skill- 
ful teacher. Many of his teachings were so terse, para- 
doxical, vividly pictorial and concrete that when once 
heard they could never be forgotten. In addition to this 
fact his disciples had unusual incentive and opportunity 
to fix his teaching firmly in mind. As will be seen later 
the main subject of his teaching was peculiarly exciting, 

*Mt. V:1-2. 


* Lk. VIII: 15. 
*Pirke Aboth 2:10. 


4 Tue Lire anp Traonine or JESUS 


“the Kingdom of Heaven at hand” which meant to many, 
“the end of the world near’; the disciples were sent out 
by him to reproduce his teaching as apprentice rabbis; 
they came back to him with reports of what they had 
done and taught ® to have any misapprehensions corrected 
by him; and especially the growing conviction that their 
rabbi was to be the Messianic leader sent by God made 
their minds alert. After his death, during the short 
period which they expected would intervene before his 
return from heaven, they had strong incentive to recall and 
teach his words. In his teaching he had showed men 
how to live in order to be ready for “the Coming King- 
dom.” His disciples now felt it to be their urgent duty 
to continue this work and pass on to all who would listen 
Jesus’ teaching about the way to get ready for the Great 
Event. All this tended to fix the exact form of the teach- 
ing in their memory. 

On the other hand there were certain influences oper- 
ative in the Gospel making period which tended to modify 
this well set, inherited body of teaching. There were 
“prophets and teachers” among the early Christian 
leaders. These Christian prophets and teachers were 
men of independence, considered to be acting under the 
direct inspiration of the Spirit of God, and to be directly 
acquainted with the mind of Jesus after he had been 
taken into the heavens. ‘Their conception of their rela- 
tion to Jesus appears in the words attributed to Peter 
when he was speaking as a “prophet”: ‘‘Being therefore 
by the right hand of God exalted and having received of 
the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit he (Jesus) 
hath poured forth this which ye do see and hear.” 1° 

®*Mk. VI:7, 30. 


* Acts XIII:1. 
* Acts I1:17, 33. 


GosPpEL Maxers AND TxHErrr TIMES 5 


That a “prophet” in his “spiritual”? independence would 
not hesitate to put words on the lips of Jesus in heaven 
appears in the Book of the Revelation of the Prophet John. 
There John the “prophet’’ repeatedly ventures to put on 
the lips of Jesus words that have always appealed power- 
fully to the Christian heart, for instance: “Behold I stand 
at the door and knock; if any man hear my voice and 
open the door I will come in to him and will sup with 
him and he with me. He that overcometh, I will give to 
him to sit down with me in my throne as I also overcame 
and sat down with my Father in his throne.” 14 

While the inherited words of Jesus would always have 
been a norm in the Gospel making period, the independent 
spirit of the Christian prophets and teachers would have 
felt authorized to make consistent additions to, or explana- 
tions of, the words of Jesus. These additions would 
naturally have become part of the authoritative words of 
Jesus. They would have been regarded as Jesus’ con- 
tinuation of his teaching through his prophets and 
teachers. ‘This would especially have been true in the 
earliest period when the speedy return of Jesus was a 
constant expectation and no idea of arbitrary limits was 
connected with the teachings remembered by his various 
disciples. | 

There were certain features of the Gospel making 
period that specially incited the prophets and teachers to 
use their authority. The period was one of controversy 
with non-Christian Jews. Jesus appeared to many such 
to have been an outrageous blasphemer whom God’s hot 
wrath had cursed with death by crucifixion. Whenever 
in this bitter controversy it was found that words of 
Jesus were being misunderstood and used to his discredit 
it would have seemed plain duty so to modify his words 

Rev. XXII:8-9, III:20-21, 


6 Tuer Lire anp Traonine or JrEsus 


as to bring out their true meaning and prevent their 
misuse. 

The prophets and teachers felt the influence of an- 
other incentive to modify the teaching in order to increase 
its usefulness. It will be shown later that for a con- 
siderable time Jesus did not make known his sense of 
mission in its full dimensions. His Messianic conscious- 
ness was a secret.1* Some of his words, therefore, took 
on a new meaning afterward when they were remembered 
with full realization of who it was that had spoken them. 
In such cases it sometimes seemed necessary so to re-phrase 
the statements as to make their real significance clear. 

Furthermore, as the teachers and prophets taught the 
words of Jesus to evangelists or to those being prepared 
to enter the organization that in the course of no long 
time began to be called “the church,” various helpful 
homiletical explanations of the words of Jesus would be- 
come fixed in form and incorporated into the body of his 
teaching. 

The situation in regard to narrative matter was some- 
what different. No original disciple of Jesus would have 
definitely set himself to fasten on his mind a picture of 
Jesus in action. It was the business of a disciple to 
remember the words of his rabbi but not to photograph 
his actions. The narrative portions of the Gospels are 
miscellaneous anecdotes long current among Jesus’ fol- 
lowers, used, as often in ancient biographies of distin- 
euishéd men, to reveal the true character of the subject 
of the gueyaiee In the case of great men there is 
always a tendency to mix legendary matter with fact. 
It is not due to conscious effort to deceive or exaggerate. 
It is due to the respectful or reverent feeling that such 
things are what we should expect from so great a person. 

™ Mk. VIII:29-30. 


GosrpEL Maxers anp Turin Timzs 7 


Devout conjecture naturally passes into conviction. It is 
the mind’s instinctive tribute to greatness. Some matter 
that appears to us unhistorical is found in the Gospel 
narrative; for instance, the statement that a good many 
graves in the vicinity of Jerusalem were opened, and that 
resurrected bodies in large numbers were seen walking 
the Jerusalem streets at the time when Jesus died and 
rose again.1® 

The ease with which the various modifying influences 
might operate to a certain extent on the Gospel making 
process in the case of both teaching and narrative matter 
is clearer when we realize that the process was probably 
a far more democratic one than we have sometimes 
thought. Many nameless prophets, teachers and evangel- 
ists had a part init. The Spirit of God would have been 
expected to work in democratic ways, especially in a period 
when it was understood that the Spirit of God was being 
poured out in democratic fashion on all flesh.1* That 
this democratic tendency was felt by many earnest people - 
in the later stages of the Gospel making process has always 
been evident from the prologue to the third Gospel: “For- 
asmuch as many have taken in hand to draw up a narra- 
tive concerning those matters which have been fulfilled 
among us... it seemed good to me also... to 
write.” 15 

The process by which the Gospels were formed, shows 
that they were not intended to be an expression of sheer 
authority, calculated to overawe the soul of man and bring 
it to unquestioning submission to dogmas and rules of 
life. This would be detrimental to the formation of char- 
acter. They were intended to beget a certain disposition 


4Mt. XXVIII: 52-53. 


% Acts II:17. 
¥ Lk, I:1-3. 


8 Tue Lirz anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


toward life, to start men out on a sincere adventure into 
the telisiows experience of Jesus. 

So far we have considered only certain general influ- 
ences operating both to preserve and to modify the Gospel 
material in the Gospel making period. There was one 
other important and more specific feature in the situation. 
Palestine was at this time a bi-lingual country, like parts 
of Bohemia before the war. Both Aramaic, a language — 
akin to Hebrew, and Greek were in use among the people. 
Greek life and language had penetrated Palestine, espe- 
cially in the northern. part, Galilee. Even in Jerusalem, 
in the south, there had been a circus and theatre in which 
Greek games and gladiatorial contests were witnessed 
from time to time. As is generally the case in a bi- 
lingual country many preferred one language to the other, 
and some knew only one. Many Jews came back from 
Jewish colonies in foreign parts knowing only Greek and 
plenty of home born Jews probably knew only Aramaic. 
All through the Gospel making period, therefore, the Gos- 
pel matter must have existed in both languages. After it 
had become necessary to put this matter into written form 
it would have been circulating in three and perhaps four 
forms: oral Aramaic and Greek, written Greek and per- 
haps written Aramaic. There would also have been 
variety in each of these fornis. | 

What forms of the Gospel material lay immediately 
behind our first three Gospels? It is possible here only to 
state the main conclusions now quite generally accepted. — 
Our Greek Gospel according to Mark is the oldest of the 
three. Perhaps behind it was an earlier form of it only 
slightly different. This Gospel, in its earlier or later 
form, was used by the compilers of our Matthew and 
Luke. They both used also another main written source, 
which afterward disappeared as an independent docu- 


Gosprt Makers and Tuerr Tims 9 


ment, namely, a collection of the teachings of Jesus com- 
monly referred to as Q (“Quelle,” “source’”’). They used 
Mark, which is composed largely of narrative matter, as 
a narrative framework. If they used Mark in its 
present form, they occasionally changed its order of 
events. Into this framework of narrative they inserted 
at intervals sections from Q, the collection of teachings. 
A minimum reconstruction of Q, therefore, would consist 
of those teachings of Jesus found in both Matthew and 
Luke, but not in Mark. However, some of Q may be also 
in Mark. It may be, also, that neither the compiler of 
our Matthew nor of our Luke used all of Q. There may 
be some teaching found in Matthew only or in Luke only 
which nevertheless came from Q. It is sometimes imag- 
ined that Q (in this case used only as a symbol for teach- 
ing in general) existed in several different collections and 
that our Matthew and our Luke represent different forms 
of Q. The compilers of the Matthew and Luke Gospel 
both used other sources written or oral in addition to 
Mark and Q. They have divergent narratives about the 
birth and infancy of Jesus. In the Matthew Gospel a 
great many references to Old Testament prophecies appear, 
probably taken from a very early collection of “‘testi- 
monia,” that is, Old Testament passages to be used for 
defending the Messiahship of Jesus in controversies with 
the Jews. Luke seems to have had access to a somewhat 
extensive source containing some very beautiful teaching 
and interesting narrative not found in any other of our 
Gospels, for instance, the good Samaritan, Mary and 
Martha entertaining Jesus, the prodigal son, the rich man 
and Lazarus, the Pharisee and the Publican at prayer, 
the ten lepers, Jesus in the home of Zacchaeus, the peni- 
tent brigand on the cross, the two disciples meeting Jesus 
‘on the way to Emmaus, etc. 


CHAPTER II 


THE SOURCES (Concluded) : 
THE FOUR GOSPELS 


T remains to describe briefly each of our four Gospels. 
Each of them in its purpose and characteristics shows 
the influence of the section of the church in which it 

was compiled. This is what we should expect for each 
Gospel was an earnest, practical attempt to bring the 
influence of the memorable deeds and words of Jesus to 
bear upon local or class needs until the time, not far 
distant, when the Lord himself should come back from 
heaven to earth. 

The Gospel according to Mark was apparently intended 
for non-Jewish readers, “Gentiles.” It contains explana- 
tions of Jewish customs that would not have been neces- 
sary for Jews. For instance: ‘Some of his disciples ate 
their bread with defiled, that is, unwashed, hands. For 
the Pharisees and all the Jews, except they wash their 
hands diligently, eat not, holding the tradition of the 
elders, and when they come from the market place except 
they bathe themselves they eat not; and many other things 
there are which they have received to hold, washing of 
cups and pots and brasen vessels.” ? 

The Gospel compiler had in mind Gentiles who had not 
yet become Christians, for he makes very slight reference 
to the Jewish scriptures. Gentiles who had become Chris- 

* Mk. VII:2-4., 
10 


Tus Four Gosrexts 11 


tians would thereafter be much interested in the sacred 
Jewish scriptures with their impressive predictions. The 
orthodox Gentile Christians, in spite of their prejudice 
against the Jews, appropriated the Jewish scriptures 
without any scruples as modern Christians have done. 

_ The Gospel according to Mark shows evangelists how to 
meet three outstanding Gentile objections to the Christian 
presentation of Jesus. The first objection is this: If 
Jesus was the Jewish Messiah, why did his own country- 
- men not at once accept him? The answer is that he did 
not let them know that he was the Messiah. He concealed 
the fact until the very end of his life.2 The second objec- 
tion is this: If Jesus really had the character of a kingly 
gracious Messiah, even though he concealed his rank, how 
could his countrymen have turned against him and cruci- 
fied him? The answer is that they did not turn against 
him; he was a popular hero from beginning to end. It 
was the ecclesiastical machine that killed him, because 
envious of his great popularity, as the Roman procurator 
very well knew.® The third is this: If he was God’s all- 
powerful Messiah why did he allow his envious enemies to 
put him to death? The answer is that he felt it to be 
God’s will that he should be killed; only by such a death 
could he accomplish his Messianic purpose.* Incidentally 
also pains are taken in this Gospel to show that Jesus did 
not share one Jewish prejudice which made the Jews very 
ridiculous and unpopular among Gentiles. When a Roman 
Emperor a few years after the death of Jesus was hurry- 
ing through his palace and gardens to inspect improve- 
ments that were being made and a dignified delegation of 
Alexandrian Jews was racing after him to get a chance 

7 Mk. VIII:27-30, XIV:55, 61-62. 


> Mk. 1:45, III:7-8, XIV:1-2, XV:9-10. 
*Mk. VIII:31, 1X:12, 31, X:45. 


12 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


to present their case piecemeal, he suddenly turned upon 
them and raised a great laugh among his obsequious 
attendants by asking why they did not eat pork.° The 
laugh probably went all over Rome. Mark’s Gospel ex- 
pressly represents Jesus by implication to have abolished 
this unpopular requirement in the law of Moses.®° No 
Gentile need hesitate to become a follower of the Jewish 
Messiah for fear of having to give up eating pork, oysters 
or rabbits. | | 
A tradition of the early church connects this Gospel 
with Rome. A still earlier tradition ascribes the Gospel 
to Mark, whom it represents to have been the reporter 
(‘anterpreter’’) of the apostle Peter. Papias, a Bishop in 
Asia Minor about 125 or 135 A.D., quotes an earlier man 
“The Elder”: “And the Elder said this also: Mark having 
become the interpreter of Peter wrote down accurately 
everything that he remembered, without, however, record- 
ing in order what was either said or done by Christ. 
’ (What follows may be the words of Papias himself.) For 
neither did he hear the Lord nor did he follow him; but 
afterwards as I said (attended) Peter who adapted his 
instructions to the needs (of his hearers?) but had no 
design of giving an account of the Lord’s oracles (variant 
reading, ‘words’). So then Mark made no mistake while 
he thus wrote some things as he remembered them, for 
- he made it his one care not to omit anything that he heard 
or to set down any false statement therein.”7 This 
language indicates that Mark’s Gospel, which we consider 
very valuable because of its priority to the others, was at 
first not so highly esteemed. The Elder or Papias seems 
to be defending it against criticism. It seemed a dis- 


* Philo, On the Virtues of Ambassadors, 45; of. Juvenal Sat. XIV. 
Mk. VII:19. 


* Quoted in Eusebius, Church History, III:39. 


Tuer Four Gosprrts 13 


orderly Gospel, miscellaneous and ill arranged, especially, 
perhaps, as compared with the careful chronological refer- 
ence to feasts, days and even hours to be found in the 
Fourth Gospel. It had no such fine body of oracles, or 
words of Jesus, as were contained in Matthew and Luke. 
Its literary style seemed crude (its rough details are often 
smoothed off by Matthew and particularly Luke in their 
use of it). It evidently seemed to many Christians an 
inadequate, incomplete Gospel. It had no infancy stories 
at the beginning and, perhaps, even then ended abruptly 
at what is now verse eight of the last chapter with no 
account of Jesus’ appearances after his resurrection.® 

In the personalities of Peter and Mark, Galilee and 
Jerusalem -were represented, for Peter’s home was in 
Galilee ® and John Mark was the son of an influential, 
well to do family whose house in the earliest days was 
headquarters for a circle of Jerusalem Christians.1° The 
Gospel presents the picture of Jesus which was current 
among the early Christians of Palestine and which is well 
summarized in the words attributed to Peter in the Book 
of Acts: “God anointed him with the Holy Spirit and 
with power, who went about doing good and healing all 
that were oppressed of the devil, for God was with him.” ?! 

This Gospel with its old Palestinian subject matter 
was compiled in Rome for the use of Italian Christians 
probably sometime in the decade 60 to 70. Exact dates 
are impossible. 

The Gospel according to Matthew seems to have been 
compiled in a section of the church whose attitude toward 
the Law of Moses was quite different from that of the 


*XVI:9-20, seems to be an ending added later. 
*Mk. 1:21, 29, III:16. 

* Acts XIT:12. 

4 Acts X:38, 


14 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


Gentile Christians in Italy. Jesus is represented as 
teaching that not the slightest commandment of the Law 
of Moses should be neglected until everything shall have 
happened,?” that is, apparently, until the end of the age 
when an entirely new order will begin.1* Certain Chris- 
tian preachers known to the compiler are evidently de- 
claring that some commandments of the law are insignifi- 
cant and need not be observed. He makes Jesus say that 
such careless preachers will be regarded as insignificant 
in the coming Kingdom of the Heavens: ‘Whosoever 
therefore shall break one of these least commandments and 
shall teach men so shall be called least in the kingdom of 
heaven.” 14 Jesus’ teaching about clean and unclean foods 
which the Christians about Rome under Mark’s (and 
Peter’s?) influence regarded as annulling the law of 
Moses, Matthew’s Gospel, in using Mark, carefully re 
stricts to a rebuke of scribal teaching about eating with 
unwashed hands. A parable is added which represents 
Jesus to have attacked only the tradition of the scribes.® 
Jesus is represented as saying that the teaching even of 
the reprobate scribes should be regarded with reverence 
in so far as they follow Moses.1® Men ought to give a 
tenth of even the smallest garden herbs, mint, anise and 
cummin, as well as to be scrupulous about the weightier 
matters.17 In the parable of the vineyard which is to 
be taken away from unworthy owners, the vineyard is not 


™Mt. V:18. 

“This may have been the position of Stephen, who apparently 
was loyal to Moses in the present age but thought that true religion 
in the new age would dispense with the temple and the temple 
ritual prescribed by Moses. Acts VI:14, VII:48-50. 

*Mt. V:19. 

* Mk, VII:19, Mt. XV:12-13, 20. 

*Mt. XXIII: 2-3. 

"Mt. XXTII:23. 


Tur Four Gosprrrs 15 


merely represented, as in Mark, to be given io “‘others,” 
which might mean Gentiles, but a sentence is added to 
the effect that “others” means “a nation bringing forth 
the fruits thereof,” }® that is, a reformed Jewish nation. 
In this nation the old twelve tribe divisions of the people 
will be re-established, and each apostle will be the ruling 
judge of a tribe: “In the regeneration when the Son of 
Man shall sit on the throne of his glory ye also shall sit 
upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of 
Israel.” 1® As the Christians look forward to the time 
_when they will have to flee from Jerusalem, they are to 
pray that it may not be necessary to do so “on a Sab- 
bath” °° either because such a journey would break the 
Sabbath, or because of the difficulty of hiring workmen 
and animals on the Sabbath in preparation for the jour- 
ney. To the great commission to make disciples of all 
nations is added the conservative clause, “teaching them 
to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you,” 74 
which means obedience to all the details of the Mosaic 
law so thoroughly emphasized in the body of the Gospel. 
That is, Matthew’s Gospel was compiled in a section of 
the church which believed that all Christians ought to 
keep the law of Moses. They did not go so far as to say, 
with the extremely conservative Christian Pharisees, that 
those who did not keep all the law of Moses could not be 
saved, for they allowed an obscure corner in the New Age 
for preachers who neglected some of the less important 
commandments.** But they felt that normal, hearty, 
first class Christians ought to keep all the law of Moses. 
It was men of this type who went from Jerusalem to 


Mk. XII:9; Mt. XXI:43 
Mt. XIX :28. 

™>Mt. XXIV:20. 

™Mt. XXVIII:20. 

= Acts XV:1, 5, Mt. V:19. 


16 Tur Lirz anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


South Galatia in the fifties and tried to persuade Paul’s 
converts there to become “first class” Christians. 

At the same time this section of the church, so zealous © 
for the Jewish law of Moses, was vigorously opposed to 
the Jewish leaders who had condemned Jesus and were 
doubtless now opposing the Christian movement. The 
Matthew Gospel exceeds the others in its denunciation of 
these men. Its various thrusts at them ?* culminate in 
the terrific polemic of chapter twenty-three. They and 
the Jerusalem mob which they have excited are pictured 
asking that the blood of Jesus may be upon them and 
their children.7* They are represented to be a set of 
rascals who bribed the Roman soldiers to give a false 
account of what happened at the grave of Jesus, a lie 
still in circulation at the time when this Gospel was 
compiled.*5 

We have here then a Gospel produced in a circle of 
conservative Jewish Christians feeling two antagonisms. 
They were antagonistic to a type of liberal Christianity, 
whether Jewish or Gentile, somewhat like that represented 
by Paul, and also to orthodox, non-Christian Judaism. 
Both of these are treated with a vividness indicating their 
immediate presence and activity. One locality where such 
a situation existed in the Gospel-making period was 
Syrian Antioch. We know from Gal. II: 11-14 that a 
serious rupture of relationship occurred there between 
Peter and Paul over questions of social conduct involving 
the law of Moses. This rupture divided the Christians of 
the region and doubtless continued after Paul and Peter 
had left, perhaps with more intensity of feeling than had 
originally characterized the leaders themselves. In such 


2 Hg. II1:7-10, V:20, VI:1-18. 
* X XVII :20-25. 
* XXVIII: 11-15. 


Tur Four Gosrrts 17 


a situation the special exaltation of Peter as an authori- 
tative teacher, peculiar to this Gospel,?® would be natural. 

The narrowly Jewish presupposition characteristic of 
this Gospel, while distinct and unmistakable, appears only 
occasionally. The great body of the teaching of Jesus 
presented in it is concerned with other things than the 
relation of Christians to the Mosaic law. It is the precious 
treasure of the church, and of all those who earnestly seek 
religious experience. 

The name of the apostle Matthew has been connected 
with this Gospel since the end of the second century. It 
has seemed to many modern scholars that an original 
apostle of Jesus, acquainted at first hand with the deeds 
and words of Jesus, would not have followed written docu- 
ments so closely as the compiler of the Matthew Gospel has 
followed Mark and Q. A clue to another theory is found 
in a fragment from Papias, the Bishop of Hierapolis in 
Asia Minor already referred to, who says that ““Matthew 
in the Hebrew (Aramaic?) dialect compiled the oracles 
(logia) and each one interpreted them as he was able.” 
It has been natural to infer from this statement that the 
apostle Matthew was the compiler of the teaching of 
Jesus, that is, of that form of Q which constitutes (with 
modifications) so large a part of this Gospel and which 
has, therefore, given his name to the Gospel.?" 

The date of the Gospel may be soon after the destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem in the year 70. The coming of the 
Son of Man is expected to be very soon after that event: 


*XVI:19, of. XIV:28-29, XV:15, XVII:24, XVIII:21. 

“Whether Papias himself interpreted in this way the tradition 
which had come down to him is another question. He may have 
understood that Matthew was the author of our Gospel which he 
called “logia” and yet the fact still be that the apostle Matthew 


had really been connected with an earlier stage of the Gospel’s 
development. 


18 Tus Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


“Immediately after the tribulation of those days... 
they shall see the Son of Man coming.” ?* This expecta- 
tion would hardly have been allowed to stand without 
some explanatory modification if any considerable time 
had passed without its fulfilment. The use of the bap- 
tismal formula, “into the name of the Father and the Son 
and the Holy Spirit,” 2° is sometimes said to be evidence 
of a date later than the year 70, but this is not a necessary 
inference. A similar combination of names appears in 
Paul’s writings fifteen years before the destruction of 
J erusalem.*° 

The Gospel according to Luke is quite different in its 
spirit from either Mark or Matthew. It is entirely free 
from the Jewish exclusiveness which characterizes the 
Matthew Gospel. Its genealogy runs back to Adam in- 
stead of stopping with Abraham as the Matthew genealogy 
does. A Samaritan twice appears as an illustration of 
true religion.®! God’s favor to other foreigners is empha- 
sized in Jesus’ inaugural message with its reference to 
the widow of Sidon and Naaman the Syrian.®?. There is 
no such emphasis on the necessity of obeying all the details 
of the Mosaic law as appears in the Matthew Gospel.** 
There is a certain Greek beauty about the Gospel. Jesus’ 
beautiful compassion for the poor and the outcast classes 
is emphasized and Jesus himself, “the Lord,” moves 
about in a kind of golden haze, “glorified” and ‘“wel- 
comed’”? by those to whom he brings his beautiful mes- 


7 XXIV :29. 

» XXVIII:19. 

»* II Cor. XIII:14. 

 X :25-37, XVII:11-19; cf. Mt. X:5, “Go not into any way of 
the Gentiles and enter not into any city of the Samaritans.” 

* IV :26-27. 

"The brief, somewhat ambiguous logion in Lk. XVI:17 may be 
the form of Q which is expanded in Mt. V:18-19. 


Tue Four Gosprrits 19 


sage.** In its use of the Mark Gospel verbal alterations 
are noticeable that make it presentable to Greek ears. It 
omits sections that were probably brought from Q into the 
Matthew Gospel but were too strongly Jewish in character 
and color to interest Greeks.** It lifts the narrative out 
of the narrow bounds of Palestine and connects it with 
world personages and events, Tiberius Cesar and the 
Augustan census. *® 

Evidence regarding the location of the Greek clientage 
for which it was compiled is furnished by the Book of 
Acts, written later by the same author and dedicated to 
the same man, Theophilus. The hero of Acts is Paul and 
that book was apparently intended to circulate among 
churches either at the time personally acquainted with 
Paul or having a fresh tradition of his earlier connection 
with them. The Gospel therefore was probably also in- 
tended for circulation among Pauline churches in the 
provinces of Galatia, Asia, Macedonia, Achaia, perhaps 
also northern Syria and Cilicia. Paul conceived Jesus 
Christ as one who was crucified, went up to God in the 
heavens and from that point of vantage operated power- 
fully in the lives of those who received the heavenly Spirit 
of God. The compiler of the Luke Gospel adjusts his 
Gospel material to this scheme. Early in the Gospel 
Jesus starts for Jerusalem, the slaughter city of 
prophets,** in order that he may be received up into 
heaven: “And it came to pass when the days were well 
nigh come that he should be received up he steadfastly set 
his face to go to Jerusalem.” #8 From this point on every- 
thing that follows is thought of as happening on the way 

“IV:22, VIII:1, 40, XV, XXI:38. 

= H.g., Mt. V:22, 33-37, VI:1-7, 16-18, VII:6, XXIII:8-10, 16-22. 

*17:1-2, TIT:1-2. 

* XIII :33. 

*1X:51. 


20 Tue Lirze anp Tracuine or JESUS 


to Jerusalem *® and the Gospel ends with his ascension 
into heaven.*® All through the Book of Acts, Jesus in 
heaven works upon his disciples on earth.** 

While neither Gospel nor Acts mentions “Luke” tradi- 
tion ascribes both books to him and identifies him with 
Paul’s medical friend mentioned in the letter to the 
Colossians IV:14. The place where the Gospel was 
compiled is uncertain. Luke was a traveler who probably 
collected his matter, oral and written, in various places. 
On the supposition that he was with Paul wherever the 
pronoun “we” occurs in the last half of Acts, he spent 
two years in Palestine in the late fifties,*? and in this 
period would have had excellent opportunity for inves- 
tigation and compilation. This might make the date of 
the Gospel to be very early (and the date of the Mark 
Gospel still earlier, since Luke used Mark). It is often 
thought that the date must be later, a considerable time 
after the destruction of Jerusalem, when it had become 
evident that the Coming of the Son of Man was not to be 
“immediately” after that event, as in Matthew, nor “in 
those days” as in Mark, but that Jerusalem must “be 
trodden down of the Gentiles until the times of the Gen- 
tiles be fulfilled.” ** However, this statement does not 
necessarily indicate a late date, for Paul in the fifties was 
writing about a Jewish apostacy to last until the times 
of the Gentiles should be fulfilled ** and was thinking that 
all this might happen in his own lifetime. A date as late 


1X :57, X:1, 38, XVIT:11. 

“XXIV:51. "Riven if the clause “and was taken up into heaven” 
is not textually secure, Acts I:11 makes it certain that this is what 
the author meant by “parted from them.” 

“1 F.9., 11:33, I1I1:16, 1X:34, XVI:7, XVIII:9, XXIII: 11, 

XXIV :27; cf. XXI: 17, XXVII: i 

“ Mt. XXIV: 29, Mk. XIII:24, Lk, XXI:24. 

“Rom. XI. 


Tar Four Gosrrts 21 


as the year 100 is possible and one as early as the late 
_ fifties or sixties not absolutely impossible. 

The Gospel according to John is an entirely new type 
of Gospel. Its subject matter does not fit into the “synop- 
sis’ common to the first three Gospels. The scene of 
Jesus’ activity is generally Judea rather than Galilee. 
The first seventeen chapters present a series of discourses 
many of them attached to a narrative incident which 
serves as a text. The literary style of these discourses is 
entirely different from that used by Jesus in the other 
Gospels. This style characterizes the discourse with which 
the author himself introduces the Gospel and re-appears 
in the First Epistle of John. The subject matter of these 
discourses is quite different from that found in the other 
Gospels. Jesus talks about himself, his nature, the sig- 
nificance of his life in a somewhat theological way and 
generally in controversy with “the Jews,” not the Scribes 
or Pharisees of the Synoptic Gospels. The Kingdom of 
God or the Heavens which is the frequent theme of Jesus 
in the other Gospels is mentioned here on only one occa- 
sion.*® The structure of the sentences is Hebrew in its 
simplicity but the introductory sentences make it at once 
evident that the Gospel was produced for a Greek or 
Greco-Jewish thought world where the presentation of 
Jesus must be adjusted to the “Logos” idea: “In the 
beginning was the word (Logos)”; “the Logos became 
flesh and dwelt among us.” *¢ 

The book is a semi-theological interpretation of the ~ 
personality of Jesus put into the popular “Gospel” form. 
The “prophet John” in the Book of Revelation, written 
for Christians in the Province of Asia, did not hesitate to 
put on the lips of Jesus in heaven messages addressed 

“III:3-5. 
nf} Oe Poe Fo 


22 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


directly to them.47 So this author, writing as is generally 
believed to the same churches, may not have hesitated to 
put whole discourses on the lips of Jesus in Palestine. 

The Gospel may have been long in the process of form- 
ing. Just as Paul probably preached the substance of 
the Letter to the Romans for many years and slowly | 
wrought out certain ways of putting things which now 
appear in hat letter, so the various discourses in this 
Gospel may have grown up separately and been finally 
combined into the present Gospel form. As in the case 
of the Synoptic Gospels, various preachers may have been 
concerned in this process. The question then would be 
whether the main witness endorsed by the sponsors at the 
end of the Gospel *® could be an apostle. 

In any case the interpretation of the personality of 
Jesus made in this Gospel is a revelation of the experience 
that men were having as they sought, like Paul, for direct 
spiritual acquaintance with Jesus glorified in the heavens. 
It is a challenge and guide to a certain type of sanely 
mystical Christian experience which always has been, and 
apparently always will be, very dear to the heart of the 
Christian church, though not in high degree the posses- 
sion of all earnest souls. 


* Rev. II, III. 
“XXI:24., 


CHAPTER III 


RELIGION IN PALESTINE AS JESUS FOUND IT: 
BUILDINGS AND SECTS 


/ VHE religious life of a nation is a complex phenom- 
enon, hard to describe even when it can be studied 
at first hand. What is the religious life of America 

or England? In presenting the religious life of a past 

age it is necessary to be cautious in at least two particu- 
lars. The surviving religious literature of the period may 
represent only one section of the life of the people; the 
most vital religion of the time, especially in a non-literary 
age, may not have expressed itself in literature at all. 

Furthermore such literature as has survived may present 

only the theory of religion, an inherited ideal that may 


not at all represent the real life of the people at the 
time.! 


*The literature of Jesus’ day available for the study of the re- 
ligious conditions under which he grew up, includes first of all such 
information ag the Gospels themselves contain, and next the writings 
of a Jew, Flavius Josephus, who was himself a product of the 
religious life of Palestine soon after the time of Jesus. He made 
his peace with the Romans before the end of the war in which they 
destroyed Jerusalem (70 A.D.) and lived in Rome for many years. 
Under the patronage of the Flavian Emperors (in whose honor he 
adopted his first name) he wrote a history of his people and a history 
of their last great war by which he hoped to lessen their unpopu- 
larity in the Greco-Roman world. 

Little, if any, of the Jewish Talmud, or Teaching of the rabbis, 
was put into writing until perhaps the third century A.D. The 
great Rabbi Judah, who died about 219 A.D., was the leader in the 


23 


24 Tun Lire anp TERAcHING oF JESUS 


The religious life of the Jewish people found expression 
for itself in two types of buildings, the temple and the 
synagogue. There was but one temple, Jehovah’s House, 
standing on a sacred historic elevation in the southeastern 
part of the walled city, Jerusalem. King Herod the 
Great, an Idumean half Jew maintained in office by 
Roman authority, who built much in many places, natu- 
rally wished to do his best in his own capital, and per- 
suaded the Jewish religious authorities to let him rebuild 
their temple. The result, almost completed in Jesus’ day, 
was a beautiful building made of white stone quarried 
under the city and trimmed with gold. “This temple 
appeared to strangers when they were at a distance like 
a mountain covered with snow, for as to those parts of it 
that were not gilt they were exceeding white.”? The 
building was the pride of the Jew, the object that he 
longed to see wherever in the wide world he lived. In the 
extensive courts and colonnades about the temple itself 
Jews from all parts of the Roman Empire could be found, 
walking about with devout curiosity or standing in prayer. 
At certain times in the year hundreds of thousands of 


work of compilation. The development of rabbinic teaching has 
continued through all the centuries. The earliest part of the Tal- 
mud contains material that can be used for a reconstruction of ideas 
that prevailed in Jesus’ day. 

In addition to these sources is a body of literature not found in 
our Bible, although produced between 200 B.C. and 100 A.D., much 
of it “apocalypse,” or “revelation” of what is going on in the un- 
seen world and of what will happen when the forces of the unseen 
world finally break into, and transform or displace, our present 
visible world. <A brief clear account of each of these documents is 
found in The Uncanonical Jewish Books by W. J. Ferrar (1918), 
and a fuller account with text and commentary in The Apocrypha 
and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament by R. H. Charles, 2 vols. 
(1913). Separate editions of many of these writings are now ap- 
pearing in an inexpensive form. 

* Josephus, War, V:6:6. 


Rexieious Buripines anp Sxcts 25 


pilgrims streamed into Palestine after extensive journeys 
by land and sea to offer sacrifice and prayer in the holy 
place. For years afterward there sounded in their ears 
in memory the tones of the silver trumpets summoning 
the multitudes to fall on their knees, the music of the 
male chorus and the temple band. They remembered 
glimpses of the rich fabric of the great curtain at the 
entrance of the temple swinging heavily in the draft of 
wind that came from the cool interior. An enthusiastic 
Jew, who lived perhaps in the time of the earlier temple, 
perhaps as late as Jesus’ day, has left a description of it: 
“Tts fabric owing to the draft of wind was in perpetual 
motion and as this motion was communicated from the 
bottom and the curtain bulged out to its highest extent, 
it afforded a pleasant spectacle from which a man could 
scarcely tear himself away.” * The pilgrims remembered 
the skill with which the athletic ambidextrous priests were 
able to take the limbs of a calf and throw them so that 
they would land on exactly the right spot on the altar. 
They saw the large companies of the priests, sometimes 
more than 700 at once, leading up animals for sacrifice, 
working in relays, some of them sitting on benches await- 
ing their turn—like a baseball team—and. everything 
proceeding with precision and in absolute silence.* They 
saw the High Priest, | 


‘When he put on his glorious robes 
And clothed himself in perfect splendor, 
When he went up to the altar of Majesty 
And made glorious the court of the sanctuary; 
When he took the portions from the hand of his brethren 
While standing by the blocks of wood. 


* Letter of Aristeas. 
“Letter of Aristeas. 


26 | Tue Lire anv Tracuine or Jesus 


“Then the sons of Aaron sounded with the trumpets of 
beaten work; 

Yea they Veinded and caused a mighty blast to be heard 

For a remembrance before the most High. 


“Then all flesh hasted together and fell upon their faces to 
the earth 
To worship before the Most High 
Before the Holy One of Israel. 


“And the sound of the song was heard 
And over the multitude they made sweet melody 
And all the people of the land cried in prayer before the 
Merciful.” ° 


The great men about the temple were the High Priests 
(that is, the officiating High Priest, ex-High Priests, and 
members of their families),® the Chief of the Temple 
Police (“the Captain of the Temple”), the lower priests, 
policemen, and the musicians. 

It has been worth while to get this picture clearly before 
us, for at one time Jesus’ enemies industriously circulated 
the rumor that he was an anarchist who proposed to de- 
stroy the sacred building, and in these temple courts he 
did the most daring deed of his whole career. 

‘While the temple was theoretically the center of the 
Jewish religion, yet in Jesus’ day it had ceased to be the 
real center of religious life. When in the year 70 A.D. 
the temple was destroyed and the sacrifices (which could 
be offered nowhere else) ceased, the religious life of the 
Jews went steadily on without serious interruption and 
has done so to the present day. The explanation of this 
phenomenon is found in another building, the synagogue, 
which because of what it represented was the real center 

* Keel. cL. 


* The High Priesthood under the Romans was no longer necessarily 
hereditary nor for life. 


Reuicious Burpines AND SECTS Ht ¢ 


of outward Jewish religious life. As its name indicates it 
was a meeting house. In it religion was brought to the 
doors of almost all Jews the world over. It was to be 
found wherever there were Jews enough to build one. The 
synagogue service was primarily a Bible school, with 
rather ample and formal opening exercises, in which 
adults and children met together to study God’s law. The 
law was taught here on the Sabbath and executed on week 
days. The building housed a Bible school on the Sabbath 
and a police court on week days: “In synagogues shall ye 
be beaten.” 7 

The great man here—the man of supreme though un- 
official influence—was the man who knew the law, the 
“Scribe.” There was an executive head, “the Ruler of 
the Synagogue,” but he did not in popular esteem rival 
the “Scribe,” if the congregation happened to have one or 
more learned Scribes, any more than the modern Bible 
School Superintendent rivals a famous teacher, if the 
school happens to have one. Synagogue rulers might 
change but the famous teacher would hold his informal 
place of influence for life. The Ruler was responsible 
for selecting those to take part in the service, for main- 
taining good order,® and for general oversight of the 
building. 
. In the audience the most distinguished members occu- 

pied the front seats, the younger men behind and the men 
and women seated separately. The service was simple. 
Certain passages of scripture, Deut. VI: 4-9, XI: 13-21, 
Num. XV: 387-41, emphasizing the command of God to 
hear his law, were recited by the leader. Anyone ap- 
pointed by the Ruler led in prayers and the audience re- 
sponded with ‘“‘Amen.” There were two scripture read- 


™Mk. XIIT:9. 
*Of. Lk. XIII:14, 


28 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


- ings, one from the “Law,” that is, the first five books of our 
Old Testament, a portion of which was definitely assigned 
to each Sabbath until the whole was read in the course of 
three years, and the other, perhaps not definitely assigned 
but selected by the reader, from the “Prophets.” ®° These 
readings in Hebrew were in Palestine translated by the 
reader into Aramaic, a verse at a time in the case of the 
law, as many as three verses at a time in the case of the 
Prophets. Then followed the sermon, an exposition of 
the scripture, a “teaching” of the lesson, by any capable 
person whom the Ruler might secure, and the service 
closed with the benediction. 

It has been worth while to get this picture clearly in 
mind for it was in the democratic synagogue service tha’, 
Jesus found his chance: “Jesus went about in all Galilee 
teaching in their synagogues;”1° and it was within the 
synagogue circle that antagonism to him began to develop. 

Before leaving the subject of buildings one other may 
be noticed which had some indirect connection with the 
religious life. The Roman barracks were near the temple. 
The notes of the Roman bugle and the temple trumpet 
sometimes intermingled. The Romans had been in the 
land since 64 B.C. They usually interfered very little 
with local custom and religious practices. They were 
peculiarly considerate of the Jews, perhaps because of 
the indebtedness of Julius Cesar to Jewish troops at a 
critical time in an Egyptian campaign.’ The Romans 
did insist on appointing the High Priest and allowing him 
to hold office only during good behavior. They expected 
in this way to enlist the High Priest’s family and follow- 
ers on the Roman side and to keep the people in order 


*Cf. Acts XIIT:15. 
* Mt. IV:23. 
* Jos. Ant. XIV:8:1-3. 


Retierovs Burpirnas anp Sxrcrs 29 


through them. The significance of this fact will be seen 
later in discussing Jesus’ relation to the priests. Jesus’ 
own attitude toward the Roman occupation became later 
a matter of general concern among the people. 

In order further to understand the religious life in 
which Jesus grew up, it is necessary briefly to describe 
the different classes into which the nation was divided 
religiously. 

First and most important of all were the “Pharisees,” 
the “Peruschim,” “Separatists,” or “Come-outers.” This 
had perhaps originally been a nickname not chosen by 
themselves, like the name ‘‘Methodists” in modern church 
life. The Pharisees called themselves ‘Chaberim,” 
“Comrades,” “Brothers.” They had an honorable an- 
cestry. They were the spiritual descendants of the brave 
men and women who in the year 167 B.C. began oppo- 
sition to the Syrian King Antiochus “Epiphanes’” (the 
“Tllustrious” ; ‘“Epimanes,” the “crazy,”’ his enemies pre- 
ferred to call him). The King proposed to unify his 
empire by destroying all local or national religions. He 
desecrated the Jewish temple by sacrificing a pig, an 
animal obnoxious to the Jews, over their sacred altar. His 
officers went from house to house compelling men to offer 
pagan sacrifice at their doors or in the streets, to stop 
circumcising their children, and.to burn their Bibles. He 
nearly succeeded in his endeavor for some of the Jewish 
priests sided with him, hoping for political and financial 
reward. The High Priest built a gymnasium near the 
temple enclosure, made the sons of high class families 
wear the broad brimmed Greek gymnasium hat and let 
the young priests neglect their temple sacrifices in order 
to spend their time in the gymnasium. A party was 
formed among the people to oppose this movement which 
was so near to success. They were at first called the 


30. Tue Lire anp TRACHING OF JESUS 


“Chasidim,” “The Pious.” Hundreds of them were put 
to death because they refused to become pagan. Their 
spiritual descendants were the ‘“‘Pharisees,” a name which 
appears first some decades later than the beginning of the 
movement. They were so called because they strenuously _ 
“separated” themselves from all foreign influence and 
consecrated themselves to the careful keeping of God’s 
law. Later they separated themselves also from all of 
their own countrymen who did not scrupulously obey the 
law of God and who might presumably be ready to yield 
to foreign influences that were always pressing hard into 
the Jewish life of Palestine, and threatening to destroy 
true religion. | 

The Pharisees of Jesus’ day stood for three fundamental 
ideas that have always appeared in religions of a high 
type: the existence of one only God, creator and provider; 
man a being of free will, but subject to God’s predestina- 
tion and responsible to him; life after death, with re- 
wards and punishments dependent on conduct before 
death. They also believed in the existence of good and 
bad spirits and an unseen spiritual world. In Jesus’ day | 
they seem to have believed in the resurrection of the same 
body that died or the passage of the soul into another 
body.?? 

The beautiful side of Pharisaism in its earlier period 
appears in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and 
in some of the synagogue prayers which may be as old as 
the time of Jesus. However, a very undesirable type of 
Pharisaism developed later, one which was bitterly an- 
tagonistic to Jesus. This type was produced by a perver- 
sion of what had originally been an excellence, namely, 
the emphasis laid on obedience to the law of Moses. Such 


“Jos. War II:8:14, Ant. XVIII:1:3 f. Apocalypse of Baruch, 
XLIX :1-LI1:16. 


Rexriaious Buinpinas AND Srcts 31 


obedience constituted men “righteous.” It became neces- 
sary, therefore, to study the law in all its details in order 
to see what it was that men must obey in order to be right- 
eous. It was easy to think that obedience to each of these 
details added something to the sum total of righteousness 
which man was set to secure. Some requirements were 
recognized as greater than others and, therefore, as yield- 
ing larger credit than others. A man’s final righteousness 
consisted in the excess of credits gained by obedience over 
debits incurred by disobedience. It was possible to ask a 
religious expert to specify some act of obedience that would 
yield enough credit to insure a favorable balance in the 
great day of reckoning and so give assurance of “salva- 
tion” beforehand. ‘‘What good thing shall I do to inherit 
eternal life?” a young man once asked Jesus. It was also 
easy to conclude that since a man might have a much 
larger credit in righteousness than he himself needed 
some of it could be transferred to those less fortunate. 
This practically, though not necessarily, reduced God to 
the status of a bookkeeper who, either directly himself or 
indirectly through expert angels, kept absolutely accurate 
accounts. It was impossible to feel any great warmth of 
affection for one who acts as a bookkeeper rather than a 
Father. In the case of those who took this view religion 
tended to become a hard mechanical matter of calculating 
commercialism that made the warm heart of love grow 
cold. 

At another point the Pharisees’ strenuous emphasis of 
law proved perilous. If a man must obey precise com- 
mandments in order to be righteous and have salvation he 
needs to ask exactly what action constitutes obedience to 
the commandments. The law commanded that the Sabbath 
day be kept holy, but in a hundred concrete cases that 
might be imagined just what action did obedience involve ? 


32 Tue Lire anp TrRACHING OF JESUS 


Tn order to meet the demand for information at this point 
a great body of explanations of the law had been developed 
and was constantly to be developed by generation after 
generation of scholarly scribes. This explanatory com- 
mentary on the law was handed down by one generation to 
the next as the authoritative “tradition of the elders.” 
It came to be regarded as practically more important than 
the law itself, naturally, because it presented the law in 
the exact form in which it must be obeyed in order that 
men might accumulate righteousness and be saved. These 
minute applications of the law probably gave satisfaction 
to a certain type of mind. Some men loved the law and 
the more commandments there were the better they liked 
it. Others were made painfully nervous by the multitude 
of opportunities to go wrong and disobey through some 
inadvertence. In general the necessity of concentrating 
attention on a multitude of petty detailed actions ex- 
hausted a man’s capacity for attention and left him little 
chance for expansion of mind in leisurely contemplation 
of large subjects and for deepening emotions in developing 
social friendships. It left him little chance to make 
character by deciding for himself whether an action 
was wrong or right and why. Men easily became so 
absorbed in “tithing mint, anise and cummin” that they 
had too little time and strength of attention left for 
“justice,” or a generous sense of fair play, “mercy,” and 
“faith” in God and man.1® This was of course fatal to 
religious development, although originally intended to 
conserve it. 

Furthermore, the determination to separate one’s self 
strictly from all who did not keep the law, while in the 
original crisis a wholesome frame of mind, became in 
less acute situations very detrimental to a truly religious 

* Mt. XXIII:23. 


Rerieious Buruprnas anp Sorts 33 


spirit. The resolve to shut one’s self utterly up against 
any other human being is always the closing up of a 
possible opening into the larger life of enlarging social 
relations. When this hard unsocial front is presented to 
the other because he is “bad” and I am “good,” a proud, 
illegitimate self-satisfaction results which ultimately 
degrades the one who allows himself to feel it. In the 
case of many Pharisees this disposition became still more 
evil because, in the course of time, to the natural pride of 
the individual Pharisee there was added class pride. 
There will be occasion to discyss this subject further when 
we study the fierce conflict that arose between Jesus and 
the more evil element among the Pharisees. This element 
most closely identified with the evil features of Pharisa- 
ism took quick offence at Jesus, stepped to the front to op- 
pose him, and thereby became the most prominent repre- 
sentatives of Pharisaism in the Gospel narratives. 
Pharisees of the better type appear only here and there 
in the background.!* 

The Sadducees of Jesus’ day were to a certain extent 
the spiritual descendants of those who in the great Syrian 
crisis a century and a half before had not been unwilling 
to become like the rest of the world religiously. In the 
earlier time some of the leading priests were of this mind, 
and in Jesus’ day, too, the high priestly element was the 
dominant center of the sect.1® 2 

The Sadducees of Jesus’ day would have resented the 
charge that they were irreligious. The lesson of the 
earlier struggle with all its brave martyrdoms had not 
been lost upon them. When Pompey’s army captured 
Jerusalem in 6° B.C. and his soldiers were running 
through the temple courts cutting the throats of all they 


“Mk, XII:28-34, Jn. III:1-2, VII:50. 
* Acta V:17. 


34 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


found there, the priests stood steadily at their altars.*® 
The later Sadducees of Jesus’ day would have described 
themselves as true conservatives in religion when compared 
with Pharisees. They did not believe in the existence of 
a spiritual world inhabited by angels and spirits, and | 
would have justified their position by citing the more 
sacred and apparently older portions of the scriptures, 
the five books of the Law in which they found no such 
teaching. On the same ground also they rejected the idea 
of continued existence after death,’” or at any rate the 
idea of a resurrection of the body.1® They rejected the 
“tradition,” accumulated by generations of scholarly 
Pharisaic scribes, and asserted allegiance to the unadulter- 
ated scriptures.1® The dependence of their leaders on 
the Romans for retention in the high priestly office 
naturally led them to take keen interest in world politics 
and to wish that the nation might play some significant 
part in world relations. Most of the wealthy Jews were 
with them because the development of “big business” re- 
quired the stable world conditions that the Romans main- 
tained. The wealthy Jews also wished for closer com- 
mercial and social relationship with foreigners than 
Pharisaic exclusiveness tolerated. The average Pharisee 
and Sadducee of Jesus’ day might be at least suggested 
by the modern ultra-conservative rabbi of the ghetto and 
the rich Jewish banker who still reverences his ancestral 
faith. 

The Hssenes were a picturesque sect that does not appear 
in the Gospel narrative and, therefore, needs no long 
discussion. They were farmer monks living on great 


1% Jos. Ant. XIV:4:3. 

* Jos. Ant. XVIII:1:4, War II:8:14. 
1% Mk. XII:18. 

*” Jos. Ant. XIII:10:6. 


Reticious Burzpinas AND Sects 85 


farms west of the Dead Sea, though they had order houses 
in some Palestinian cities. They were celibates (with 
the exception of one section); had common property; 
were obedient to their official superiors; ate in silence at 
common tables; bathed frequently and used no oil; wore 
white garments never discarded until worn out; had secret 
doctrines and books containing the names of angels; took 
no oath but were absolutely truthful and famous for 
kindliness; kept the seventh day Sabbath; worshipped 
Jehovah and sent offerings to the temple, but seem not to 
have sacrificed in the regular way (according to Philo 
they sacrificed no animals) and so to have been excluded 
from the temple court; felt reverence for the sunlight; 
held a Greek view of immortality which did not involve 
the resurrection of the body.?° 

Josephus ranks with the Pharisees, Sadducees and 
Essenes, what he calls ‘‘a fourth philosophic sect.” It 
came into existence in Judea during the boyhood of 
Jesus, spread like an infection through the nation, espe- 
cially among the young men, and led finally, as Josephus 
thought, to the capture of Jerusalem and the destruction 
of the temple by the Romans in 70 A.D. It was a protest 
against Roman taxation. Judas the Galilean and his 
associate Saddouk the Pharisee “both said this taxation 
was nothing better than an introduction to slavery, and 
exhorted the nation to assert their liberty.”” The move- 
ment had a distinctly religious side: “They also said that 
God would not otherwise be assisting to them than upon 
their joining with one another in such counsels as might 
- be successful and for their advantage.” ? Jesus may 
have been in contact with the revolutionary movement dur- 
® Jos. Ant. XVIII:1:5, War II:8. Philo On The Virtuous Man 


Being Free, XII. Pliny Nat. Hist. V:17. 
™ Jos. Ant. XVIII:1:1. 


36 Tue Lire ann TracniIne or JESUS 


ing his boyhood and business life in Nazareth, and must 
have had to reckon with it later in public teaching. 

The average citizen is a term that would probably in- 
clude the large majority of the nation in any religious 
classification. According to Josephus there were only | 
about 6,000 Pharisees and still fewer Sadducees. The 
body of the nation naturally looked to the scholarly scribes 
for religious leadership and the scribes were generally 
Pharisees. A man of any sect might become an expert 
student of the law and so be a scribe, but since the Phari- 
sees were most devoted to the law most of the scribes were 
of their party. The dominance of the Pharisaic influence 
over the people was due not only to the fact that the 
Pharisees stood for the great fundamental truths of 
religion which appeal powerfully to the hearts of those 
who are religiously inclined, but also to the fact that they 
and their scribes seem generally to have been in possession 
of the synagogues and so to have had the equipment 
requisite for a vigorous propaganda. The people did the 
best they could to keep the law as the scribes taught them 
to and were sorry that they so often failed. Sometimes 
the character of the scribe was such as to make them 
suspect that he did not always incur the inconvenience of 
living up to his own strict teaching. Then people went 
home from the synagogue service grumbling that the 
scribes “bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne and 
lay them on men’s shoulders but they themselves will not 
move them with their finger.” 2 

There were also irreligious Jews, so-called “sinners,” 
no better than “sinners of the Gentiles,” ?* who fell away 
from the synagogue service and made no effort to keep 
the law of Moses. These “sinners” were regarded as were 


™Mt. XXIII:4. 
* Gal. II:15. 


Reuiaiovus Burtpines anp SrEcts 37 


men and women in an old colonial New England town 
who never went to church. They were, however, not so 
isolated as the non-church going colonialist for on every 
side of them were foreigners in comparatively large num- 
bers. Some Palestinian cities were more thoroughly 
Jewish than others, but everywhere Greek life pressed in 
upon Jewish life. There were fine business openings for 
shrewd Jews who would do business with foreigners. 
There were lucrative offices to hold in collecting taxes. 
The Jewish tax collectors were specially offensive to the 
scribes because their business required them to have such 
intimate, defiling contact with foreigners whose goods 
they inspected, on holy Sabbath days as well as on other 
days, to say nothing of general Jewish scorn for a fellow 
countryman who would help collect the unholy tax im- 
posed by a foreign government on God’s people. So 
“publicans” were classed with sinners and harlots. 
Through these irreligious Jewish and foreign strata of 
society there must have flowed streams of influence every- 
where current in the eastern world. Religious ideas and 
-supérstitions of many sorts from many countries would be 
talked of on roads and in markets by itinerant merchants, 
travelers, soldiers, slaves. These do not appear distinctly 
in the Gospels but Jesus must have found them as he 
moved about in close contact with ‘‘publicans and sinners.” 


CHAPTER IV 


RELIGION IN PALESTINE AS JESUS FOUND IT 
(Concluded) : 


THE KINGDOM OF GOD AND THE MESSIANIC 
HOPE 


NE feature of the religious situation, more or 
() less affecting all sects and classes, needs considera~ 
tion by itself: the Kingdom of God and the 
Messianic expectation. The Jews, because of their geo- 
graphical location, midway between the East and the West, 
had always been in touch with great world empires, 
Babylon, Egypt, Persia, Greece, Syria, Rome. Though 
they were a small nation they were compelled to think in 
world terms. Their sense of being the chosen people of 
Jehovah, the One God of all the earth, resulted in a 
colossal ambition. The strongly religious element in the 
nation believed that Jehovah would finally set up a world 
empire of his own on a grand scale in which, of course, he 
would make his own people the dominant world power. 
The phrase “Kingdom of God,” or “Kingdom of the 
Heavens” does not appear frequently in literature before 
the Christian period, although the idea is frequent enough. — 
In the Gospels the phrase is used as one by that time © 
familiar to everyone and needing no explanation. 
There were various opinions as to the process by which 
the Empire of God would be established. It might be by 
38 


Kinapom or Gop anp THE Mersstanic Horz 39 


military force. If so, since Jewish armies were neces- 
sarily small the direct re-enforcement of God would be 
required. This had not been lacking in the past. God 
had given help to resolute little bands of Jewish soldiers, 
facing great odds, when the Syrian king had tried to 
destroy Jehovah’s religion. He had sometimes destroyed 
huge alien armies by pestilence, or by putting strange 
terror into their hearts, or by leading them into the sea 
and drowning them. Jewish history gave plenty of en- 
couragement to military revolutionists. Some of the 
synagogue teachers were often reminding their audiences 
of these inspiring facts. On the other hand it was easy 
to feel that God himself, unaided by men, might blaze 
out from heaven with destructive glory and consume the 
enemies of his people. There were some who pictured a 
peaceful missionary propaganda that would convert the 
nations of the earth to Jehovah’s ways. But the Jews 
had suffered much at the hands of the nations and it would 
have seemed only right to most of them that their suffer- 
ings should be avenged by their God. 

In connection with this idea of the Kingdom of God 
there had also developed the expectation of a “Messiah.” 
The word means “Anointed” and was translated into 
Greek as “Christos.”” Men were set apart as prophets or 
priests or kings, by being “anointed” with oil. The king 
especially was “God’s Anointed.” It was natural to think 
of the Great King in the Kingdom of God as “The 
Anointed,” ‘The Messiah,” “The Christos.” It was, how- 
ever, entirely possible to separate the idea of the Kingdom 
of God from Messiahship. There were those in Jesus’ 
day who thought that God would himself be the king and 
would anoint no one to rule for him. They probably 
pointed out the fact that God had originally objected to 


1Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. 


40 Tus Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


having a king over his people. But the idea of a king 
was a favorite one. God had given them great kings in 
the past, notably David, “a man after his own heart.” 
There were kings on every side and an emperor at Rome. 

The current ideas were vague at many points. If there 
was to be a Messianic king, where would the king come 
from? And when? How long would he reign? What 
sort of rule would he enforce? What would he do with 
foreigners?) What would be his relation to God? What 
would be the relation of the earth and its inhabitants to 
all the angel inhabitants of the seven heavens that arched 
above the earth? Would the righteous dead have any 
part in the Kingdom? And what would become of the 
wicked, living and dead? There was ample chance for 
speculation to run riot. Regarding certain points, how- 
ever, Opinion was not entirely chaotic. 

There were two general types of expectation among 
those who looked for a Messiah: the “Son of David” and 
the “Son of Man” type. The David dynasty had seemed 
to end centuries before but it was felt that God did not 
intend the dynasty to become extinct. There were still 
obscure families here and there that traced their lineage 
back to David. Some one among them, who had inherited 
the ancient warrior king’s military genius and devotion to 
Jehovah, might be raised up by God to be the leader of 
his people. This expectation in its best form appears in 
“The Psalms of Solomon,” David’s son, sometimes called 
“The Psalms of the Pharisees,” a collection of eighteen 
Psalms produced some fifty years before the birth of 

*J Sam. VIII:4-22. 

*It is perhaps a question how widely the “Son of Man” type was 
known among the people. It was held in apocalyptic circles but it 
may well have been known beyond the circles that held it. For the 


contrary view see Strack and Billerbeck, Das Hvangelium nach 
Matthdus Erlautert aus Talmud und Midrasch, p. 486, 


Kinepom or Gop anp tHE Mrssranico Horn 41 


Jesus. The Psalmist recognizes that God is king over all 
forever and that his kingdom is everlasting, but that he 
had chosen David as under-king and promised that his 
dynasty should not fail. Now the Psalmist prays that 
God will raise up for the people “their king, the Son of 
David.” He will free his people from foreign control, 
make Jerusalem the capital of his kingdom and bring 
back the twelve tribes from all over the earth. 


“And he shall gather together a holy people whom he shall lead 
in righteousness, 
And he shall judge the tribes of the people that has been 
sanctified by the Lord his God. 
And he shall not suffer unrighteousness to lodge any more in 
their midst, 
Nor shall there dwell with them any man that knoweth wick- 


edness, 
For he shall know them that they are all sons of their God.” 


‘And he himself will be pure from sin so that he may rule a 
_ great people. 

He will rebuke rulers and remove sinners by the might of 
his word; 

And relying upon God throughout his days he will not stumble; 

For God will make him mighty by means of his Holy Spirit, 

And wise by means of the spirit of understanding with strength 
and righteousness.” * 


The “Son of Man” idea had a different origin. In 
chapters XX XVII-LX XI of the “Book of Enoch,” to be 
dated the first century B.C., about the time of the Psalms 
of Solomon, Enoch, who is being conducted through the 
heavens,® learns of an exalted heavenly being called ‘“‘Son 
of Man.” Back of this usage there may be some ancient 
idea of “The Man in Heaven” above all angels and next 
to God. Whatever may be the lineage of the idea, in the 


*XVII:28-30, 41-43. 
*XLVI:2. 


42 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


Book of Enoch that Heavenly Man, or “Son of Man,” who 
had been with God always is called “the Anointed,” and 
is chosen by God to break in upon the earth and perform 
functions commonly regarded as Messianic: overthrow all 
oppressors in a great world judgment and on a transformed 
earth bring peace to men forever more. 


“And this Son of Man whom thou hast seen 
Shall put down the kings and the mighty from their seats, 
And the strong from their thrones, 
And shall loosen the reins of the strong, 
And break the teeth of the sinners. , 
And he shall put down the kings from their thrones and king- 
doms 
Because they do not extol and praise: him, 
Nor humbly acknowledge whence the Kingdom was bestowed 
upon them.” ° 


“For that Son of Man has appeared, 
And has seated himself on the throne of his glory, 
And all evil shall pass away before his face.” ‘ 


“He shall be a staff to the righteous whereon to stay them- 
selves and not fall, 
And he shall be the light to the Gentiles, 
And the hope of those who are troubled of heart.” 


‘And the righteous and elect shall be saved on that day, 
And they shall never thenceforward see the face of the sinners 
and unrighteous. 
And the Lord of spirits shall abide over them, 
And with that Son of Man shall they eat 
And lie down and rise up forever and ever.” * 


The author of this section of the Book of Enoch shows 
in at least one place that he is not unmindful of a passage 

*XLVI:4-6. 

*LXIX:29, 


®*XLVITI:4. 
®* LXII:13-14., 


Kineapom or Gop anp THE Messrantio Horr 48 


in the prophecy of Daniel.?® In chapter VII of Daniel 
four world empires are symbolized by four beasts that 
come up out of the sea. Then the God of heaven intro- 
duces his empire, symbolized not by a brute form but by 
a human form, “one like unto a son of man,” coming not 
out of the destructive sea, but on clouds from heaven. It 
was perhaps theoretically possible to conceive of the Son 
of Man as embodying himself in a Son of David. 

In chapter XIII of IV Esdras (before 70 A.D.) “the 
man out of the sea” flies on the clouds, defeats the nations 
assembled against him on Mount Zion and performs an 
apparently Messianic judgment. 

Another Messianic title, “Son of God,” fitted into either 
the “Son of David” or the “Son of Man” type. The 
nation was thought of as God’s Son,** and especially the 
King,!” so that the “Son of David” would be the “Son of 
God.” The inhabitants of heaven were “sons of God;” 
it is said of the righteous dead after the resurrection that 
“they are equal unto the angels and are sons of God being 
sons of the resurrection.” 1? Especially is this title applied - 
to superior angels like the sons of God who in the prologue 
to the Book of Job appeared before God. So the heavenly 
“Son of Man” would naturally be called the “Son of 
God.” It is also true that a good man was called a “son 
of God.” 14 In the later development of Christian ex- 
perience and theology it was the title “Son of God” that 
was utilized as suggestive of the deeper meaning recog- 
nized by Christians in the Messiahship of Jesus. 

There were various ideas regarding the length of the 
Messiah’s reign in the Kingdom of God. There are 


# XLVI-XLVIII. 

4 Ex. IV :22-23, Hos. XI:1, Ps. of Solomon XVIII:4. 
“II Sam. VII:14, Ps, LXXXIX:26-27. 

wLk. XX:36. 

% Wisdom of Solomon II:16, 18, Ecclesiasticus XXIII:1. 


44 Tue Live anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


traces of the opinion that it would endure for a thousand 
years, a “millennium.” In IV Esdras, a Jewish writ- 
ing near the end of the first century A.D., the Messiah 
reigns 400 years, dies a peaceful death together with “all 
in whom there is human breath.” Then, after seven days 
of silence like that which prevailed before the present age 
began, will occur the resurrection and the New Age, “the | 
Age which is not yet awake.” 1° According to another 
view the Messiah judges men and the Kingdom of God 
follows the judgment and endures for an indefinite 
time.*® | | 
There were two views among the Palestinian Jews 
regarding the fate of foreigners when God’s New Age 
should dawn on the world. The most lenient view in the 
literature produced near the time of Jesus is found in the 
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs about 100 B.C. 


“The Lord shall visit all the Gentiles in his tender mercies 
forever.” ™ 


“The twelve tribes shall be gathered together there (at the 
temple), and all the Gentiles, until the Most High shall 
send forth his salvation.” » 


“He shall save Israel and all the Gentiles.” * 


But about the same time another element in the nation 
expresses a very different disposition: “And all the idols 
of the heathen will be abandoned: the temples will be — 
burned with fire and they will be removed from the whole 
earth and they will be cast into the judgment of fire and 
will perish in wrath and in grievous eternal judgment.” 2° 


%*TV Esdras VII:26-44, 
%T Cor. XV :25-28. 

4 Levi. IV :4. 

* Benj. IX :2. 

# Asher VII:3. 

* Enoch XCI:9. 


Kinapom or Gop anp THE Messranic Hopr 45 


A book produced in the time of Jesus’ boyhood pictures 
the Jews on high looking with gratitude down into 
Gehenna upon the sufferings of their enemies.24 Some 
who felt that God’s compassion would include foreigners, 
still felt that they would never rank up with Jews in his 
sight: , 


“They shall have no honor through the name of the Lord of 
Spirits, 
Yet through his name shall they be saved, 
And the Lord of Spirits will have compassion on them, 
For his compassion is great.” ™ 


Among those who anticipated salvation for foreigners 
in the Kingdom of God, there were different views as to 
the terms on which they would be let in. Most of the 
evidence for lenient terms is found in Jewish communities 
outside Palestine. The Sibylline Oracles ?* specify as 
conditions to be met by proselytes, who would presumably 
thereafter be regarded as eligible for future admission 


-into the Kingdom of God, grace before meals, keeping 


away from pagan temples, no murder, no dishonesty in 
business, no sexual immorality, and baptism. The Book 
of Acts speaks repeatedly of “devout Greeks,’ or ‘“God- 
fearers,”’ in synagogue audiences outside of Palestine. 
They were evidently persons who did not become Jewish 
proselytes but worshiped Jehovah. They probably ate 
no pork, observed the Sabbath as well as they conveniently 
could, and kept away from the worship and women of 
pagan temples. Conservative Jews in the audience would 
have looked askance at them, while the liberal Jews were 
more cordial. All appreciated the money they often 


= Assumption of Moses X:10. 
™Enoch L:3. 
* Book IV, lines 24-33, 162-170. 


46 Tus Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


brought to the synagogue treasury.** We know of one 
synagogue in Palestine where such persons were present. 
In this case, the synagogue building was the gift of one 
of them.2®° Perhaps there would have been many such 
mixed audiences if Greek had been the language of the 
Palestinian synagogue as it was among the Jews of for- 
eign countries. There were doubtless both liberal and 
conservative views as to what chance such people would 
have to find a place in the coming Kingdom of God. The 
most conspicuous case of the liberal viewpoint in early 
Christian literature is the grandmother of a famous 
assistant of the Apostle Paul, Timothy of South Galatia. 
This woman let her daughter marry a Greek, presumably 
an uncircumcised attendant of the synagogue. The son 
born of this marriage was faithfully instructed in the 
Jewish scriptures by his pious mother and grandmother 
but they allowed him to grow up without the Jewish rite 
of circumcision. ‘This they would not have done if they 
had supposed that they were shutting the boy out of the 
Kingdom of God. In Palestine such conduct would 
probably have seemed scandalous and there were evidently 
plenty of conservatives to criticize it in the region where 
it happened.?® | 

Enough has been said to show that there was a wide 
range of divergent opinion among religious people re- 
‘ garding the coming Kingdom of God. It was to be a time 
when ideals would be realized, and ideals varied. Modern 
Christians look forward to “heaven” with very vague ideas 


“¥.g., Acts X:1-2. 

*Lk. VII:2-5. 

“IT Tim. III:15, Acts XVI:1-3. Cf. also the case of King Izates 
whom the Jewish merchant-preacher, Ananias, converted to Judaism 
without having him circumcised, but who was later persuaded to 
circumcision by the stricter Pharisaic Jew, Eleazar. Jos. Ant. 


XX :2::3-4. 


Kinapom or Gop anp THE Messianic Horr AT 


of what it will be like, but sure that it will bring the 
realization of their ideals. The Pharisee looked forward 
to the Kingdom as a situation in which all the people 
would keep the law of Moses as the scribe interpreted it. 
A Messiah was not essential to the realization of this 
ideal. The scribes were equal to the task if God would 
only touch the hearts of the people. Those who did expect 
a Messiah regarded him as one who would maintain a 
situation in which the scribe could do his work effectively. 
The Sadducees, priests and men of big business, were well 
satisfied with the present situation. They had no desire 
to see the narrow minded rabbis have their way. A 
Messiah who sided with the rabbis could ruin business. 
To encourage the Messianic idea meant the overthrow of 
Rome, and Rome was the source of all their prosperity. 
The great body of the people who longed for the Kingdom 
wanted it to bring them a better living, more food and 
clothing and leisure, together with social recognition and 
political pre-eminence everywhere. | 

More or less common to all classes of society who 
possessed the expectation at all were these three ideas: 
the triumph of righteousness, that is, the doing of 
Jehovah’s will as expressed in his holy law and the con- 
sequent enjoyment of great peace and prosperity; the 
political supremacy of the Jews in all the earth—either 
the earth as it is or a transformed earth—though other 
nations if submissive might have some share in their 
prosperity; the realization of this result through the 
activity of God’s under-king, the Messiah, whose judgment 
would banish evil men from the earth. 

It was in the public life of this turbulent Jewish world 
with its vague and diverse ideals that Jesus, when about 
thirty years of age, for some reason felt constrained to 
find his place and make his way. His attempt lasted only 


48 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


a short time, perhaps two years and a half, and resulted 
in an execution by crucifixion followed almost imme- 
diately by a wonderful outburst of prophetic enthusiasm 
among his disciples. In this short time he wrought out 
something which has held the attention of men ever since, 
something the full meaning of which is not yet clear. He 
started new life in the world. His personality marks the 
boundary between things new and old. By an increasing 
number of the human race all events in history are 
reckoned as occurring Before or After Christ. 


CHAPTER V 


JESUS IN PRIVATE LIFE 


life as a private citizen. Only for a little while 

near the end did he become a public character.! 
When he appeared as a public teacher he had a mature 
character and a well established general viewpoint, which 
must have been developed during the years of his private 
life. He must have passed through a profound religious 
experience during this period and thought deeply on 
the subjects he discussed in his public teaching. This 
does not mean that the great crises through which Jesus 
so rapidly passed in the course of his brief public career 
contributed nothing to the deepening of his religious ex- 
perience and the further development of his character. 
It was the conviction of the early Christian leaders that 
Jesus “learned obedience through the things that he suf- 
fered” and that only in this way did he become “unto 
all them that obey him the author of eternal salvation.” ? 


A S has just been said, Jesus lived almost all of his 


*The length of Jesus’ public career is uncertain. The Fourth 
Gospel mentions three Passovers (11:13, VI:4, XVIII:28) and pos- 
sibly a fourth (V:1). According to the Fourth Gospel, therefore, 
Jesus’ public career lasted cither a little more than two or a little 
more than three years. In the Synoptic Gospels only one Passover 
is mentioned in the account of his public life, namely, that at the 
time of which he was crucified. However they narrate more than 
could easily have happened in a fraction of a year or even in a 
whole year. 

* Heb. V:8-9. 


49 


50 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


When they used this language they evidently had in mind 
his public career and especially his experience in facing 
death and all that led up to his execution. But it is 
still true that the long years of private life in Nazareth 
must have been profoundly significant. What a man 
does in an emergency is largely determined by what he 
has been doing for years before. If Abraham Lin- 
coln during his years of private life had not been 
always brooding over the great problems of national 
life and fixing upon the main lines along which their 
solution was to be sought, he could not have been the 
kind of President he later became. At the same time his 
later experience as a public man contributed much to his 
development. 

We know very little about the details of Jesus’ life be- 
fore he became a public character. The early disciples 
by whom our Christian Gospels were shaped either were 
unable to learn much about these details or, more prob- 
ably, had little interest in them. Jesus’ life had been 
so commonplace and even poor in its material circum- 
stances that the portrayal of it would have hindered rather 
than helped in the presentation of him to the Greco-Roman 
world as the majestic Messiah of God, the Lord of 
heaven and earth soon to return to the earth in heavenly 
power. The Gospels give information at-only two points, 
both of which contribute to this main purpose: the 
Matthew and Luke Gospels speak of his birth and Luke 
describes a scene in his boyhood. The wonderful life that 
Jesus’ disciples found themselves living in the decades 
immediately following his death was attributed by them 
to inspiration poured into their souls by Jesus glorified in 
heaven.* In certain circles this wonderful life seemed 
logically explained by the theory that Jesus, the source 

* Acts I1:33. . 


JESUS IN PrivaTE LiFe 51 


of it, had been born as the result of the direct and ex- 
clusive action of God upon his mother. Such a theory 
was not uncommon in the Greco-Roman world as an ex- 
planation of remarkable men, nor was it inconsistent with 
Jewish thought. This conviction was not confined to one 
section of the church, for the two forms of it in Matthew 
and Luke are so different that they are not likely to 
have prevailed in the same region, or at least in the same 
circles.* 

The data afforded by the early chapters of these Gospels 
place the birth of Jesus sometime between the year 8 B.C., 
the possible date of a Roman census decree which may 
have required considerable time for its execution, and the 
death of Herod the Great in the year 4 B.C. The year 
5 or 6 B.C. is a probable date.® 

Both Gospels represent the birth to have been in Bethle- 
hem of Judea. In Luke’s Gospel the birth story is pre- 
ceded by beautiful hymns ascribed to the mother of Jesus 
and the father of John the Baptist. With devout poetic 
imagination the sky on the birth night is peopled with a 
chorus host of angels who proclaim peace on earth to all 
men of good will (or men who please God), while an 
angel messenger announces the birth of ‘‘a Savior who is 
Christ a Lord,” or “an Anointed Lord.” With an ap- 


*The theory of miraculous birth seems not to have been used in 
ordinary preaching. The missionary sermons reported in the Book 
of Acts contain no allusion to it, nor do the letters of Paul. The 
Fourth Gospel, which has as its avowed purpose the proving “that 
Jesus is the Christ the Son of God,” does not include the miraculous 
birth in its proof. The author evidently did not regard it as an 

essential part of the proof, else he would not have omitted it. He 
may have believed it (a possible variant reading of 1:13 indicates 
that he did), but he did not press its acceptance upon others as 
essential to their belief in “Jesus Christ the Son of God.” 


*Lk. II:1; Mt. If:1. Ramsay, Was Christ Born in Bethlehem, 
Chs. VIII, IX. 


52 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


preciative emphasis of the poor and lowly, characteristic 
of Luke’s Gospel, the announcement is made to shepherds 
in the fields. They are first to greet the new-born babe 
lying in a manger in the lower story of the khan, where 
animals were kept, the upper story (or perhaps a nearby | 
building) being already fully occupied by travellers who 
had come to Bethlehem for the census enrollment. A few 
days later in the neighboring city of Jerusalem the par- 
ents make the offering at the temple prescribed for peo- 
ple of meagre means in the case of a first born child. 
Here an aged man and woman recognize the child as des- 
tined to be connected in some wonderful way with the 
long expected exaltation of the Jewish people to a position 
of world supremacy. 

The Matthew Gospel reports a visit to Jerusalem made 
by magians from the interior of Asia, students of the 
stars who had found in the heavens a sign of the birth of 
a great Jewish king. (During the years 6-8 B.C. there 
are known to have been notable conjunctions of planets.) 
They learned from Jewish scholars in Jerusalem that the 
sacred scriptures predicted such a birth in Bethlehem. A 
miraculous light led them to the exact spot in Bethlehem 
where the infant Jesus lay and they laid royal gifts be- 
fore him. They were warned by God in a dream to go 
directly home without letting the Great Herod know 
where his infant rival was to be found. The parents of - 
Jesus were also warned by God in a dream to flee to 
Egypt with their infant child in order to escape from 
‘the evil suspicions of Herod. Herod to make sure of de- 
stroying this new-born rival of himself and his heirs, 
killed all the boy babies in Bethlehem under two years 
of age. It is not in place here to consider how much 
of these narratives is the product of the devout imagina- 
tion of those who later found in Jesus a Lord and Savior 


Jesus IN Private Lire 53 


lifted into the heavens and given power to control the 
destinies of mankind. 

Both Gospels give genealogies tracing the lineage of 
Jesus through David to Abraham (Lk. on to Adam “who 
was the son of God”). The lines of descent between Jesus 
and David are quite different in the two Gospels. These 
differences were much discussed by Christians of the sec- 
ond and third centuries. Julius Africanus accounted for 
them on the supposition that they resulted from the levirate 
law by which a man married his brother’s childless widow 
and counted the first born son as belonging to his brother. 
One genealogy was supposed to give the actual father in a 
given case and the other the legal father. It is also 
said that the Matthew genealogy gives the line of royal 
succession from David to Jesus, which was not always from 
father to son, while Luke gives the actual descent from 
father to son. It is furthermore sometimes said that 
Matthew gives Joseph’s lineage while Luke gives that of 
Mary the mother of Jesus. There seem to be no data 
for an entirely satisfactory explanation of the differences. 

Luke’s Gospel contains an incident out of the boyhood 
of Jesus in which his early and intense interest in the dis- 
cussion of religious truth appears. When he went up at 
the age of twelve years to the Passover festival in Jeru- 
salem he could not tear himself away from the beautiful 
temple. He stayed behind in Jerusalem, after his parents 
started for their home in Galilee, probably hoping to fol- 
low later in company with other Nazareth friends. His 
parents turned back to search for him and found him in 
the temple colonnades listening to the discussions of the 
famous Jerusalem rabbis, asking them questions and giv- 
ing remarkably thoughtful replies to their questions. An 
oriental boy of twelve is more mature than a modern 

* Eusebius, Ch. Hist. 1:6. 


54 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


boy but Jesus seemed to the scribes wise beyond his years. 
The point emphasised by Luke is that he had a deeply 
satisfying sense of being where he belonged. When his 
parents told him that they had been looking through the 
city for him, he wondered that they should have looked 
anywhere else than at the temple. The sense of belong- 
ing to God his heavenly Father and belonging in the 
House of God was warm and strong within him." 

Explicit information about Jesus’ private life ends here. 
The most that can be further learned regarding it has to 
be inferred from hints in the Gospels and from general 
knowledge of life in Palestine. We know that he lived 
in Nazareth,’ a town of Galilee, situated near some of the 
great roads that connected the farther East with the Medi- 
terranean and Egypt. Within sight from the hill tops 
about Nazareth all the varied traffic of these roads could 
have been seen in the distance. Places made famous by 
the heroes of Jewish history were also within the range of 
vision. The historic associations that were fixed upon the 
minds of the Nazareth boys by their parents and their 
teachers were in influence like those of a Massachusetts 
boy who lives near Bunker Hill, Lexington and Concord 
or a Virginian who lives near historic sites of Old Domin- 
ion days and the period of the Civil War.°® 


Lk. IT:41-51. 

*Lk. I[:39, 51, Mk. 1:9. 

°“The position of Nazareth is familiar to all. The village lies on 
the most southern of the ranges of Lower Galilee, and on the edge 
of this just above the Plain of Esdraelon. You cannot see from 
Nazareth the surrounding country, for Nazareth rests in a basin 
among hills; but the moment you climb to the edge of this basin, 
which is everywhere within the limit of the village boys’ playground, 
what a view you have! Esdraelon lies betore you, with its twenty 
battle-fields—the scenes of Barak’s and of Gideon’s victories, the 
scenes of Saul’s and Josiah’s defeats, the scenes of the struggles for 
freedom in the glorious days of the Maccabees. There is Naboth’s 


JESUS IN Private Lire 55 


Jesus had in Nazareth the experience of home life which 
is so fundamental in the development of character. He 
was the oldest son in a rather large family of children. 
They with their mother Mary were all living in Nazareth 
when Jesus returned later as a public teacher. The 
names of his four brothers were James, Joses, Simon and 
Judas. There was also a group of sisters who had prob- 
ably married Nazareth men. “His sisters are they not all 
with us,” the Nazareth neighbors said.1° They were 
such very ordinary people that the neighbors found it 
difficult to think of Jesus as the extraordinary man he 
seemed to have become since leaving home. Since his 
father is not mentioned in this connection he must have 
been dead. If he had been long dead responsibility for 
the support of some at least of the younger brothers and 
sisters had for a time rested largely upon Jesus as the 
oldest and unmarried son. He knew from experience the 


vineyard and the place of Jehu’s revenge upon Jezebel; there Carmel 
and the place of Elijah’s sacrifice. To the east the Valley of Jordan, 
with the long range of Gilead; to the west the radiance of the 
Great Sea, with the ships of Tarshish and the promise of the Isles. 
You see thirty miles in three directions. It is a map of Old Testa- 
ment history. 

“But equally full and rich was the present life on which the eyes 
of the boy Jesus looked out. Across Esdraelon, opposite to Naza- 
reth, there emerged from the Samarian hills the road from Jeru- 
salem, thronged annually with pilgrims, and the road from Egypt 
with its merchants going up and down. The Midianite caravans 
could be watched for miles coming up from the fords of Jordan; 
and, as we have seen, the caravans from Damascus wound round 
the foot of the hill on which Nazareth stands. Or if the village 
boys climbed the northern edge of their hollow home, there was 
another road within sight, where the companies were still more bril- 
liant—the highway between Acre and the Decapolis, along which 
legions marched, and princes swept with their retinues, and all sorts 
of travellers from all countries went to and fro.” 

G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land, pp. 432 f. 

© Mt. XIII:55-56. 


56 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


anxieties of the poor regarding which he spoke with such 
effect later in his public teaching. He and his mother 
may often have said: “What shall we eat? What shall 
we drink? Wherewithal shall we be clothed?’ He had 
learned from deep experience, perhaps in wakeful hours 
at night, that the heavenly Father knows our need of all 
these things and that those who mean to do right, who 
resolutely “seek first the Kingdom of God and its right- 
eousness,” may trust him to give them a chance to earn 
what they need.‘ There is indication that family life 
did not always run. smoothly. There were family “jars” 
especially after the younger brothers married and brought 
their young wives home to live with their mother-in-law. 
Jesus’ own conscientious convictions, implied in “seeking 
first the Kingdom of God and its righteousness” may have 
led him to do some things in business that seemed queer 
and unpractical. It will appear that his family later 
thought him temporarily to have lost his mental balance, 
and that his brothers later did not esteem him as his 
disciples did.12. The peculiar phrasing of one of his teach- 
ings is perhaps evidence that he was sometimes a divisive 
element especially between the other children and their 
parents: “I came to set a man at variance against his 
father, and the daughter against her mother and the 
daughter in law against her mother in law.” 78 

Jesus had also the discipline of business life as a char- 
acter forming influence in Nazareth. He is called “the 
carpenter” and “the carpenter’s son.” ** As a carpenter 


“Mt. VI:31-33. 

Mk. III:21, 31-35, Jn. VII:5. 

Mt. X:35. The primary reference of this utterance would be 
to what happened later when there was conflict between Jesus’ 
disciples and their relations, or between the church and the syna- 
gogue. Cf. Micah VII:6. 

4 Mk, VI:3, Mt. XIIT:55, 


JESUS IN Private Lire 57 


he would have made the simple furniture of the houses. 
Justyn Martyr, himself a native of Palestine, said that 
Jesus made yokes and plows.'® If the word carpenter 
can be extended to include the building of houses, either 
as workman or contractor, he would have needed to be a 
stone mason also, for then as now the houses were prob- 
ably not made chiefly of wood. In business he would have 
become familiar with the petty side of human nature. 
He would have had delinquent debtors to dun, over critical 
customers to satisfy, fair bargains to drive with shrewd 
over-reaching business men skilled in the tedious process 
of oriental bargaining. What he had to say later about 
the damaging effect of riches on character may have been 
learned by repeated observation in business life. He 
doubtless knew what it was to have a year or a month 
when he ran behind. He may also have known how it 
felt to begin to accumulate and get ahead. He may have 
felt the inclination to lay up treasure on earth at any 
cost and fought it down. If he was an employer of labor 
he knew what it was to put up with slackers. He may 
have sometimes visited the markets at intervals all through 
the day looking. for men who, he knew, would be hard up 
and in need of employment. Perhaps he sometimes paid 
them at the end of the day in a queer way according to 
their needs and not their exact earnings! 1® Perhaps, too, 
he himself at some stage of his career had stood until the 
eleventh hour waiting for a chance to earn what the family 
needed that day. 

Jesus experienced the upbuilding influence of close 
social contact with friends and neighbors. He helped 
them celebrate weddings. He knew how a wedding week 
ought to be celebrated and may himself many times have 


* Dialogue c. LXX XVIII. 
* Mt. XX:1-16. 


58 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JzEsus 


been one of the “sons of the bridegroom” who helped to 
make the wedding feast a social success.17 He later de- 
scribed himself as one who “came eating and drinking” 
and recognized the slanderous exaggeration of his social 
habits.'* He mourned with his neighbors at their funerals 
and comforted them, always remembering the day when 
his own large family group had walked wailing behind 
the bier of the dead father and had come home to take 
up new burdens. 

He talked with friends and neighbors about the politics 
of the country, the burden of heavy taxes, the revolution- 
ary movement of Judas and Saddouk (p. 35). He heard 
the pros and cons of joining it discussed in his shop and 
about the synagogue door in the evening. 

He sat with friends and neighbors in the synagogue 
service. As a boy he grew restive under the teaching 
of tedious scribes and made up his mind how he would 
teach if he ever got the chance. The great vital themes 
that stirred his mind as a boy among the Jerusalem 
scribes at the temple were burning in his heart for years. 
As a child at home, and in the synagogue school he had 
been taught the scriptures. He heard them read each — 
Sabbath in the synagogue. He probably had some scrip- 
ture rolls himself and had learned to read the Hebrew 
text.19 Could he read them in Greek ? 

In all these elemental relations—with home, with 
friends, with work—which God has ordained as the means 
of making character Jesus grew. Plain daily life is a 
situation devised by God for teaching men how to love 
and use power, and in such a situation the character of 
Jesus was developed. In such a situation he was find-— 

Mk, 11:19. . 


*Mt. XI:19. 
* Lk. IV:16-20, cf. I Mac. 1:56-57. 


eh 


JESUS IN PrivaTEe LiFe 59 


ing God. Profound awareness of God was possessing 
all his soul—God the Heavenly Father, so near him in 
his work, in wakeful nights when anxieties pressed in 
upon him, in peaceful nights when he prayed long under 
the stars; the Heavenly Father who gave the flowers their 
beauty, the birds their food, and noted the fluttering un- 
fledged sparrow’s fall from its nest. 

In all these relations a vision of ideal life was form- 
ing in his mind. He saw life as it was, saw the good 
and the bad, the compassionate and forgiving, the spiteful 


_and vengeful, the pure in heart, the poor in spirit, the 


meek, the proud and the contemptuous. He saw life as 
it was and as it ought to be. He saw exactly what was 
needed. He thought long over the revolutionary plans and 
propaganda of Judas of Gamala or his successors. He 
watched young men of his own age leave home with the 
light of adventure in their eyes to conspire with the revo- 
lutionists. He saw a better way, a way that grew brighter 
and seemed always truer as he held it up before the 
Heavenly Father. 

It is not impossible to picture the character making 
process that went on in Jesus, for we have learned from 
his teaching the elements of enduring character and the 
process by which they come into being. But when it is 


+ all done we seem not to have accounted for that which 


appeared later in his public life. There seem to be cer- 


tain original dimensions of personality which we do not 
~ measure, a certain something coming up in him with over- 


flowing fulness from the underlying life of God which 
we do not understand. Evidence of this we find later 
in the period when his kindling sense of mission was upon 
him. 


CHAPTER VI 
JESUS’ INTRODUCTION TO PUBLIC LIFE 


ESUS entered public hfe! in the midst of a period 
of national excitement which was religious as well 
as political. While the political revolutionary move- 

ment of Judas and Saddouk, or their successors in leader- 
ship, perhaps now more highly developed in the north, 
was slowly gathering the momentum that finally resulted 
in the destruction of Jerusalem, a movement exclusively 
religious * was stirring the hearts of the people in the 
south, in Judza. While the revolutionist was urging men 
to resent taxation, the prophet John was urging men to 
repent of their sins. ‘John came who baptized in the 
wilderness and preached the baptism of repentance unto 
remission of sins. And there went out unto him all the 
country of Judea and all they of Jerusalem and were 

*The date of Jesus’ entrance upon public life cannot be certainly 
fixed. Lk. II1:23 says that Jesus at this time was “about” thirty 
years old. If about thirty means exactly thirty, and if the date 
of his birth was 6 B.C. (p. 51), then his public life began in 24 A.D. 
However, this does not agree with the statement in Lk. III:1-2 that 
John the Baptist began preaching in the fifteenth year of the reign 
of Tiberius, which would be some time between 26 and 29 A.D. 
according as the reign is reckoned to begin A.D. 12 when Tiberius — 
became joint provincial ruler with Augustus or A.D. 14 when he 
succeeded him. Perhaps the expression “about thirty” might be 
used of a man two or three years older than thirty and perhaps the 


birth year might be 5 B.C. instead of 6 B.C.. A not improbable date 
therefore is A.D. 27. 


*The ruling Herod naturally saw in it possibilities of political 
mischief, Jos. Ant. XVIII:5:2. 


60 


Jesus’ Intropuction to Pusuic Lire 61 


baptized of him in the river Jordan confessing their 
sins,” § 

The religious moveiment which John led must. have to a 
certain extent helped the revolutionary movement on. 
Many in the crowds who heard John announcing the near. 
ness of the Judgment Day and the New Age did not con- 
tent themselves with being baptized but also joined the 
Judas-Saddouk revolutionary groups. They not merely 
repented of their sins but were ready also to use violeat 
measures for bringing in the Kingdom. Jesus had such 
persons in mind when he later said: “From the days of 
John the Baptist the Kingdom of Heaven is being taken 
by violence and violent men are seizing it by force.” 4 

Jesus, who in his northern Galilean home had studied 
the political movement for a long time, cast his lot in with 
the religious movement in the south, and, as it has turned 
out, by so doing gave it a permanent place in men’s minds, 

In order to understand Jesus’ action it 18 necessary to 
understand the character of the prophet John and the 
nature of his movement. According to Luke’s Gospel 
John was an only child, born late in the life of Judean 
priestly parents. His parents consecrated him to an ascetic 
life and he grew up somewhere in the country districts 
of Judea, perhaps near the great Essene farms (p. 34), 
drinking no wine, living on desert food, dried locusts and 
wild honey. He wore over his shoulders a hairy pelt, 
perhaps in conscious imitation of ancient prophets (Zech. 
XIITI:4), and about his waist not a sash or cord, but a 
leather strap.© With his rough dress and uncut hair ® 
he must have looked like a modern dervish. 

* Mk. 1:4-5. 

‘Mt. XI:12. 

*Lk. 1:5-6, 15, 39, 80, Mk. 1:6. “Camels’ hair’ might mean a 


cloak woven of camels’ hair. 
*He was probably a Nazarite, cf. Numbers VI:1-5, with Lk. 1:15, 


62 Tre Lire anp TRACUING OF JESUS 


Just how John’s movement began is not clear. There 
may originally have been some gathering of ascetics who 
fasted and prayed and consecrated themselves to holy liv- 
ing by a baptism,’ but soon the movement took a more 
popular form. There were several reasons why great 
crowds poured out from Jerusalem and the surrounding 
country in response to the rumor that such a man was 
making a proclamation and beginning to gather a band of 
followers about him in the Jordan wilderness. The first 
was the exciting character of his announcement: The 
Judgment Day and the Kingdom of God are at hand; re- 
pent and be ready! Judgment was represented to be 
very near. It was as if the farmer had already come, 
winnowing-shovel in hand, te separate wheat from chaff. 
The ax was laid at the roots of the trees while the 
farmer was making a final inspection to determine which 
to save and which to cut down.® Furthermore, John’s 
movement was instantly popular because it was expected 
that in the last days just before the Judgment a group 
of God’s ancient prophets would return to his people to 
prepare them for the Judgment, chief among whom would 
be the old hero-prophet Elijah, and John resembled Elijah 
in his dress.° Furthermore, Elijah had disappeared in 
the very region where John was now preaching with an un- 
compromising sternness that seemed like the old prophet. 
Elijah had re-entered the earth where he left it to pre- 
pare the nation for the great Day of God’s eines? 
that would usher in his Havent | 

The national sins against which John preached were 
racial pride, greed for money and indifference to human 


*See Jackson and Lake, Beginnings of Christianity, Vol. I, Pp. 
101-6. . 

rv te TIT SZ O12. 

°Mt. XVI:14, Mk. TX:11, Mal. I1V:5-6, II Kings I:8. 


Jesus’ IntropucTION To Pusiic Lirs 63 


need. Unlike Judas and Saddouk he called for order 
rather than for revolution. Soldiers were not to get money 
by browbreating and blackmailing civilians, and were to 
be content with their wages. The publicans were to be 
honest and all men were to be quick to relieve the needy.?° 
His message was like that of the most ethical of the old 
Hebrew prophets, whose teaching Jesus had studied from 
boyhood. 

John emphasized his message by a dramatic ceremony 
which symbolized its meaning and gave him his peculiar 
title, “The Baptizer.” He called on all men to go down 
into the Jordan in his presence *? and immerse themselves 
in its waters as a dramatic declaration that they had 
repented and wished to be morally clean. This was a 
familiar ceremony, performed by all foreigners who be- 
came Jewish proselytes, but now, just before the Judgment 
Day, all the nation was called on to perform it. The 
banks of the Jordan were crowded with excited multi- 
tudes who, as opportunity was from time to time given 
by the prophet, stretched their hands to heaven confess- 
ing their sins, called on God for forgiveness, crowded into 
the water for baptism and emerged singing Psalms,?* 

Out of the crowds who flocked to hear him a body of 
“disciples” was formed, the nucleus of which may have 
existed before he became a public character. He taught 
these disciples to observe frequent periods of fasting and 
to use forms of prayer.** ‘This body of disciples con- 
tinued with him us long as he lived and did not break up 

* Lk. III:7-14. 

™ “Before him” Lk. III:7, Codex D. 

“Cf. Sibylline Oracles, IX:164 ff. “Wash your whole bodies in 
ever-running rivers and, stretching your hands to heaven, seek for- 
giveness for your former deeds, and with praises ask pardon for 


your bitter ungodliness.” 
*Lk. V:33, XI:1. 


64 Tus Lirr ann TEACHING oF JESUS 


after his death. Twenty years later some of them were 
found outside Palestine, in Ephesus.14 At the end of 
the first century such a sect was still to be reckoned 
with by Christian preachers in the vicinity of Ephesus, 
for the first three chapters of the Gospel of John (pro- 
duced near Ephesus) seem to assume its existence by 
repeatedly emphasizing the inferiority of John the Baptist 
to Jesus.4° There are still later traces of it.1® 

The power of John’s personality was such that many 
among the crowds began to wonder whether he was not 
himself the one whom God would select to act as his 
Messiah in the approaching Judgment Day.’? It was 
this disposition that led John to speak of the “Coming 
One” in terms of comparison with himself. He would 
himself not be found fit to stoop and untie the sandal 
thong of the Mightier One when he should arrive. That 
this Mightier One was thought of by John as the Mes- 
sianic Leader in the Coming Kingdom, and not as an- 
other prophet coming to prepare the people for the 
Kingdom, is evident from the fact that he is represented 
to be the one who will send the Spirit of God surging 
through the hearts. of men, a morally purifying baptism, 
of which John’s water baptism was only the weak symbol, 
and the one whose Judgment Day will be a baptism of 
fire for the unrepentant.'® This function of fiery judg- 


“Acts XIX:4. 

*1:6-9, 19-20, 26-27, 29-30, III :26-30. 

* Clementine Recognitions 1:54, 60. 

Lk. III:15. The fact that he was not of the David family (in 
the tribe of Judah) would have seemed no insuperable objection in 
their minds. A century and a half earlier (Testaments of Twelve 
Patriarchs) there had been a large party who reached the conclusion 
that one of the Maccabean priest-kings (of the tribe of Levi) would 
turn out to be the Messiah, and John, as we have seen, belonged 
to the tribe of Levi. 

Mt. III:11. 


Sha ee al eine oy — —_ 


fceide 


a, ee en 





Jesus’ Inrropuction To Pusuic Lirr 65 


ment and sending of God’s spirit is Messianic. It will 
show that the Kingdom has arrived and not simply drawn 
near. 

And yet it is noticeable that John does not use an 
unequivocal Messianic title in describing the Coming One. 
He does not call him “Son of David” which would have 
encouraged men to expect a warrior king and so would 
have played into the hands of the revolutionary leaders. 
Neither does he call him “Son of Man,” or even use the 
neutral title “The Messiah,” or “Christ.” Perhaps it was 
not clear to his own mind exactly how the Great Leader 
in the New Age of Righteousness would function. Or, 
more probably, he may have shrunk from any specific ref- 
erence to a “Messianic Ruler’ for this would naturally 
have made his movement suspicious in the eyes of the 
Roman authorities whose Herodian spies were very likely 
in the crowds. He preferred rather to characterize him, 
as the Great Propagator of Righteousness, the One 
Baptizing with the Holy Spirit and with Fire. 

In the course of time Jesus appeared among the crowds 
at the Jordan and went down into the baptismal waters 
with the rest. This fact later caused the early Christians 
considerable embarrassment. It was easy for Jewish op- 
posers of the Christian movement to say that Jesus by 
this act declared himself a sinner—and so no true Messiah 
—and also confessed himself inferior to John, since the 
one under whose auspices baptism is received would be 
greater than the one who came seeking baptism.’® The 
Matthew Gospel, which more than either Mark or Luke 
shows consciousness of Jewish opposition in its environ- 
ment, guards against this misrepresentation by reporting 
a dialogue, in which John is made to recognize Jesus’ 
superiority and in which the baptism is declared to be an 

*Cf. I Cor. I:12-16. 


66 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


act of positive righteousness rather than a confession of 
sin, an act of righteous obedience to the voice of God in 
his soul.2° John’s Gospel which was also written in the 
midst of sharp Jewish antagonism omits the baptism of 
Jesus entirely. | 

All three Synoptic Gospels describe the heavens open- 
ing as Jesus was coming out of the water, a dove which 
is said to be the Holy Spirit, coming down to him, and 
a voice out of the open heavens calling him the Beloved 
Son and expressing approval of his past life. He is no 
sinner. In the Matthew Gospel the spirit of the dialogue 
between Jesus and John is further made evident by rep- 
resenting the voice to have addressed John and pointed 
out Jesus: “This is my Beloved Son.” In Mark and 
Luke Jesus is addressed: ‘Thou art my Beloved Son.” 
It seems clear that the compilers of the Gospel intend this 
to mean that Jesus is announced by God from heaven 
to be the Messiah. God’s Holy Spirit comes upon him 
for his Messianic work. They do not understand the an- 
nouncement to have been a public one, for they later rep- 
resent the people :to be ignorant of Jesus’ Messiahship 
and meant by Jesus to be kept in ignorance of it.24_ The 
meaning of the incident was perfectly plain to the early 
Christians as they looked back upon it in the light of 
all that happened afterward. But what is plain enough 
afterward is not always so unmistakably clear at the time. 

That John at the time did not think of Jesus as neces- 
sarily the Messiah, the Mightier One, whose coming was 
felt by him to be so near, is indicated by the fact that 

* Mt. IIT:13-15. “Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan 
unto John, to be baptized of him. But John would have hindered © 
him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to 
me? But Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it now: for thus 


it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffereth him.” 
* Mk. VIII:27-30. 


Jesus’ Intrropuction to Pusuic Lire 67 


later when he was in prison he sent messengers to Jesus 
to inquire whether he felt himself to be the Messiah, the 
Coming One.?? It is perhaps not impossible to regard 
this later action of John as due’ to temporary doubt oc- 
casioned by the gloom of prison life. But it seems more 
probable that John’s question marked the beginning of a 
surmise that Jesus might be the Messiah, a surmise occa- 
sioned by Jesus’ wonderful deeds. This is clearly the idea 
of the compilers of the Gospel: ‘Now when John heard 
in the prison the works of the Christ he sent by his 
disciples and said unto him, Art thou he that cometh, or 
look we for another?’ Jesus, in reply to John’s question, 
sent back a description of himself in terms that would 
naturally suggest Isaiah’s vision of Messianic days and 
works,?* and added to it a personal injunction calculated 
to encourage John to watch for further developments and 
not be offended by him as the scribes had been. Further- 
more the fact that John had retained his disciples and that 
they had been willing to stay with him instead of going 
to Jesus, indicates that John had not thought Jesus to be 
the Messiah. 

Did Jesus himself find an assurance of the Messiah- 
ship in the baptismal experience? In what frame of mind, 
with what purpose and expectations, did Jesus make the 
journey from Nazareth to Judea and what experience did 
he have in connection with his baptism? He came to 
the Jordan a mature man, who had reflected for years on 
the great themes of religion, and who had developed an 
experience which was capable of sustaining the great re- 
sponsibility that was later laid upon him. He also found 
himself in harmony with the ideas of the prophet John 
and desired to identify himself with John’s movement. 


= Mt. XI:2-6, Lk. VII:18-19. 
™Ts. XXXV:5-6, LXI:1. 


68 Tue Lire anp Tracuine or JxEsus 


This is evident enough from the fact that he came to the 
Jordan, but also appears later in his eulogy of John in 
which he declared that no greater man had ever lived; 
John was the equal of Abraham, Moses and David! *4 
Jesus’ public life shows him often in close social connec- 
tion with publicans and sinners in whose capacity for, and 
inclination to, repentance he had large confidence. Now 
he joined them as they passed penitently down into the 
river. His soul was profoundly stirred and as he came 
out of the waters he was praying.*® ‘Then the vision broke 
forth in his soul! The dove and the voice are not to be 
thought of as something that could be photographed and 
dictographed but as features of a profound spiritual ex- 
perience producing a physical effect determined by current 
habits of thought and local conditions. The mind of a 
Jew would be psychologically prepared for a message 
through a vision and a voice. The Spirit of God was 
thought of as like a fluttering bird.2® The vision did 
not produce the inner experience, but the inner experi- 
ence produced the vision. The sudden strong up-welling 


life of the Heavenly Father in the depths of his soul could » 


have seemed to him nothing less than the Spirit from 
heaven. The new-sense of being not simply a son of the 
Heavenly Father, to which he had been long accustomed, 
but of being “The Son, The Beloved” could be nothing 
less than the voice of God calling him to assume some form 
of leadership in the New Age the expectation of which 
was thrilling the hearts of thopsands. He had come with 
no ambition to rival John, simply to take his place among 
the multitudes with a deep passion for God’s New Age 


“Lk. VII:28. 
* Lk; IT :21. 


* Cf, Gen. 1:2; Abrahams, Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels, 


pp. 47-50. 


Ce a a ~ ee 


Jzesus’ IntrRopuctTion to Pusuic Lire 69 


of righteousness, and now he found a new world of action 
suddenly opening to him and presenting problems that 
filled his soul with awe and drove him to solitude and 
prayer. 


CHAPTER VII 


THE PERIOD OF DIFFICULT DECISION 


' , YE have seen that various views of the Kingdom 


of God were current among the Jews in Jesus’ 
day (ch. iv). They differed as to its ideals, the 
methods by which these ideals were to be realized, the 
length of its duration, its immediate ruler, its relation 
to foreigners and its relation to the existing heavens and 
earth. We have not to think of Jesus as seeing clearly 
beforehand step by step the career that he was now be- 
ginning as leader in this vast enterprise. If he had 
possessed such foresight in detail his after life would 
necessarily have been artificial and his ability to draw 
men to him with morally redeeming power far less than 
it has proved to be. Such leadership was for him an un- 
explored country into which he had now to make his 
pioneering way. ‘There are indications, to be noted later, 
that he was not at first sure that this leadership involved 
any one of the different careers technically called Mes- 
sianic.t It is because he faced problems hard to solve 
and with immense possibilities of good and evil hanging 
upon his decisions that Christian experience, though not 
always Christian theology, has recognized in him “one that 
*If the virgin birth was a fact and Jesus had already been in- 
formed of it, such information would not have changed this situa- 
tion. Alexander the Great may have believed, or half believed, the 
story that a god was his father, but this did not relieve him from 
the responsibility of planning his campaigns. 
70 


Prriop or Dirricutt Decision eg | 


hath been in all points tempted like as we are.”? He 
had now to interpret to himself in terms of definite action 
the meaning of his experience at baptism. He had re- 
ceived summons within the depths of his own soul to 
some form of leadership that was first of all a leadership 
of the nation, for no truly religious Jew at that time 
thought of God’s Reign in the earth as to be realized in 
any other way than through God’s People. Jesus through- 
out his career dealt primarily with all problems of life 
and character as they confronted him among his own 
people. Two questions he had now to answer: First, 
what ideal of life ought God’s Son, the Beloved, to hold 
before God’s People as he leads them on into God’s New 
Age; that is, what will daily life and character in 
the Kingdom of God be like? And second, what 
practical program shall be adopted for realizing this 
ideal ? 

For the consideration of these questions Jesus went 
away alone into the wilderness, driven by a strong inner 
compulsion.* The disciples of John the Baptist, with 
whom Jesus had just been associating, observed frequent 
periods of fasting and prayer. Although Jesus differed 
from them in this particular,* their practice seemed to 
_him appropriate for this great crisis. He is said to have 
remained in seclusion for forty days. The Gospels present 
a report of what took place during these six weeks in the 
form of a dialogue between Jesus and Satan. This dia- 
logue can be read in thirty seconds and the entire nar- 
rative in one minute. The dialogue is concerned with 
stones to be turned into bread, a proposed leap from some 
high point on the temple to the pavement below, and an 

* Heb. IV:15. 


*Mk. I:12. 
*Mk. IT:18-19. 


72 Tuer Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


instantaneous vision® of all the kingdoms within the 
limits of the composite Roman Empire and beyond. This 
reads like an attempt to state the gist of the great struggle 
that went on for six weeks within the soul of Jesus in 
the form of parables, or semi-parables, a method of pre- 
sentation that Jesus often used in his teaching. In this 
presentation rival ideals of a leader’s career compete for 
Jesus’ adoption. It is possible to suppose that this nar- 
rative was the creation of the Gospel makers who wished 
in this way to show to their Jewish opponents that the 
current Jewish ideal of Messiahship, which Jesus did 
not adopt, was endorsed by Satan! But on the other hand 
it is clear that this antagonism between two ideals of 
leadership must have existed first of all in the thought 
and soul of Jesus himself. He himself at some time had 
to decide to what ideals and program he would commit 
himself. It is entirely in accord with a reasonable prob- 
ability to suppose that this report was made by Jesus 
himself to his disciples at some time in their history when 
they especially needed it for the development of their 
own characters. It is chiefly in differences of detail in 
the narratives presented in Matthew and Luke that the 
shaping hand of the Gospel makers is to be seen. 

What light then does this condensed and very suggestive 
narrative throw on the actual experience of Jesus during 
these eventful weeks? The conduct of Moses in a similar 
situation is evidently in the background. The three quota- 
tions of scripture made by Jesus are all taken from the 
section of Deuteronomy in which God places before Moses 
his ideal of national life at a time when Moses might have 
led God’s people into God’s New Land if he had not failed 
in the day of his temptation. Moses received this ideal 


~ “In g moment of time,” Lk. IV:5. 
*Deut. VI:1-3, VIII:3, VI:16, 13, ef. 1:37, 


Pretiop of Dirricutt Decision (hie 


during forty days of lonely fasting.? (That this was in 
the mind of the compiler of the Matthew Gospel is seen 
in the fact that he adds the phrase “and forty nights,” 
quoting Deuteronomy.) Many thought of the Messiah as 
one who would be a second Moses. Moses’ statement about 
his successor was thought to be a reference to the Mes- 
siah: “A prophet shall the Lord God raise up unto you 
from among your brethren like unto me.” ® It was nat- 
ural that Jesus should study carefully this revelation of 
God made to Moses. If he could read Hebrew he may 
have taken with him into the wilderness a roll of scrip- 
ture containing this part of the law and reflected upon it 
for weeks. 

As the lonely days passed Jesus had the consciousness 
of contending with something evil. Various possible ideals 
and programs passed before his mind. Some of them 
were at first very attractive and pulled him powerfully 
toward them, but after longer reflection they seemed to 
him inferior to others, therefore to be rejected and at- 
tributed to the source of all evil, which in the thought 
of Jesus’ day was the personal Satan. It was the reign on 
earth of the evil Adversary, Satan, that was to be ended 
by the coming of the Kingdom of God. Jesus, therefore, 
would naturally have thought of Satan as intimately con- 
cerned with what was going on in his own mind. 

One great phase of Jesus’ experience during these weeks 
is presented in the parable of Stones turned into Bread, or 
a stone to be turned into a loaf of bread.® Everyone 
expected the Great Leader to see to it that the New Age 
should be characterised not only by righteous obedience 
to God’s law but also by an abundance of food and other 

™ Deut. IX:9, 11, 18. 


* Acts IIT:22. 
°Mt. IV:3, Lk. IV:3. 


74. Tue Lire anp TRacuina or JESUS 


physical comforts. Both of these characteristics appear in 
Deuteronomy.*® Moses had secured free bread for the 
people in the wilderness.’ In the Apocalypse of Baruch, 
a document current soon after Jesus’ day, this description — 
occurs : 


“The earth also will yield its fruit ten thousandfold, and on 
one vine there will be a thousand branches, and each branch 
will produce a thousand clusters, and each cluster will produce a 
thousand grapes, and each grape will produce a cor of wine. 
And those who have hungered will rejoice: moreover, also they 
will behold marvels every day. For winds will ge forth from 
before Me to bring every morning the fragrance of aromatic 
fruits, and at the close of the day clouds distilling the dew of 
health. And it will come to pass at that self-same time that 
the treasury of manna will again descend from on high, and 
they will eat of it in those years, because these are they who 
have come to the consummation of time.” ” 


The practical question that naturally arose was, on 
which of these characteristics, righteousness or material 
prosperity, should the heavier emphasis be placed; toward 
the attainment of which one should he immediately move 
out. Jesus’ nature, as will appear later, was extremely 
sensitive to the needs of the poor. Their lack of food 
and clothing, the pains of the diseased bodies on every 
side, which the meagre medical knowledge of the day could 
not cure, stirred his compassion. He had thought of their 
condition for years in Nazareth. His own present hun- 
ger and weakness were a vivid reminder of how multitudes 
in the nation and in the great world felt as they went to 
bed hungry and weak and sick night after night. The 
first thing that God’s Son ought to do, so it would naturally 
* Deut. VII:12-26, X:12-22. 


“Jn. V1I:31-32. 
1a XX1X :6-8. 


Prriop or Dirricutt Decision 75. 


seem, would be to stop this terrible suffering. This Jesus 
felt strongly inclined to do on some such large scale as 
God’s power would now make feasible.1* But this, after 
long reflection, he felt he ought not to do. The real nature 
of the temptation, in this case and in the other two as 
well, appears in Jesus’ reply. He shows what he was 
tempted to do in telling why he will not do it. The reason 
that he denied his natural benevolent inclination here was 
because, as God had told Moses in the earlier revelation of 
his ideal for the nation, “‘man’”—man in general, all men— 
“shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that 
proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” That is, the first 
responsibility of God’s Son in the New Age was not to 
provide physical comforts, but to get men to listening 
to the voice of God, to fix upon men the habit of feel- 
ing and yielding to the ever present energy of the will of 
God pressing upward in their souls for expression in ac- 
tion. If this disposition could be secured, human brother- 
hood would result and physical comforts would abound 
for all men. He determined to attack directly the cause of 
the disease and not merely to alleviate its symptoms. The 
conclusion that he reached here affected all his subsequent 
teaching and policy. He told those who were worrying 
over lack of food and clothing, that their Heavenly Father 
knew well their need of these things and that when men 
set their hearts on the “righteousness,” the fair play and 
good will, of God’s Kingdom, a civilization would result in 


“It is often said that Jesus was here tempted to do something 
for himself which other men could not do for themselves, to exempt 
himself from their physical limitations. This can hardly be the 
case, for it will appear later that Jesus had a sublime confidence 
in his ability to share with other men whatever power he himself 
_ possessed. He need not have hesitated here to do for himself what 


_ he was perfectly willing to show other people how to do for them- 
selves. 


%6 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


which all these things would be added as a natural 
consequence.'* The oldest narrative source, Mark’s 
Gospel, represents Jesus at times to have avoided the 
healing of disease because it seemed to be threatening 
the success of his main object, the propagation of right- 
eousness.!® | 

In the parable of the Leap from the Temple Roof 
Jesus reports that he saw himself in imagination on some 
lofty part of the temple looking down on the pavement 
below, perhaps at thousands of people waiting for the 
temple trumpet notes to sound the signal for falling upon 
their faces in prayer. It is possible that he contemplated 
for a time, in these days of tense feeling, the feasibility 
of going to the temple and expecting God to present him 
to the nation by some such impressive miracle. This 
would have met popular expectation: “The Lord whom 
ye seek shall suddenly come to his temple.” 1® For a 
time a sentence in the ninety-first Psalm seemed to en- 
courage such venturesome reliance on God’s protection. 
This Psalm expresses such sense of nearness to God as had 
been developed in Jesus during the Nazareth years. It 
begins, “He that dwelleth in the secret place of the Most 
High, shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.” In - 
vy. 13 it mentions such triumph of man over powerful and 
venomous animals, “the lion and the adder,” as was to 
be man’s in the New Age.’ It closes with a promise of 
seeing Jehovah’s “salvation,” which would mean life in 


“Mt. VI:31-33. 

* Mk. I:32-38, 43-45. 

% Mal. III:1. 

Ys. XI, Lk. X:17-19. In the Mark Gospel (1:13) ideas of this 
sort, current in the early church, are expressed. It was felt that 
retinues of the Devil’s wild beasts and God’s angels were both in 
the vicinity as Satan and the Holy Spirit worked upon the soul of © 
the Messiah. 


| 


| 


Perriop or Dirricutt Drcision fr 


the Kingdom of God. This Psalm describes God’s angels 
holding up a falling man: 


“For he will give his angels charge over thee, 
To keep thee in all thy ways. 

They shall bear thee up in their hands, 

Lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.” 


But as Jesus reflected on the situation this adventure 
seemed to him not to receive God’s approval and he at- 
tributed the suggestion of it to an evil source. His reply, 


“Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God,” shows that 


he came to regard such action as presuming upon God, 
as rushing forward in the enthusiasm of a newly dis- 


covered mission expecting God to sustain him in what- 


ever picturesque exhibition of power he might wish to 
make. He must not assume that his sense of leadership 
is necessarily ‘‘Messianic.” He must not seek personal 


prestige. He must rather wait for God to thrust him 


forward in his own good time into whatever sort of leader- 
ship God may will. As a result of this conclusion he 
kept the sense of Messianic leadership, which did develop 
in him later, a secret from the public until the very end 
when the revelation of it cost him his life. His mission 
was not at first to overbear men with startling exhibitions 
of sheer power, but to hold before the nation ideals of 
righteousness that should win their assent, produce char- 
acter and prepare them for the life of the New Age. 

The third parable is that of World Empire through 
Temporary Compromise with Satan. The Kingdom of 
God in Jewish thought was to be a world empire in which 
Jerusalem would be the capital and all positions of in- 
fluence be held by Jews. What Romans were in the 
Roman Empire, Jews would be in the Kingdom of God. 
Jesus, therefore, by all the traditions of his people was 


78 Tue Lire anp Tracitina or JESUS 


compelled to think of the empires of the world, the mag- 
nificence of their buildings, the glory of the burnished hel- 
mets and armor of vast armies, the majesty of the courts 
of the Emperor, his high officials and under-kings in all. 
parts of the world. In some moment of ecstatic vision all 
the golden glory of royalty throughout the world passed 
before him. His profound desire was to secure all this 
for Jehovah, to let the everlasting glory of God’s radi- 
ant heavens into the royal courts and to transform their 
millions of subjects into obedient sons of the Living God. 
The real temptation here lay in the choice of a method 
of accomplishing this high purpose. The method that is 
represented to have appealed to Jesus for a time was that 
of temporary compromise with evil, a moment on his knees 
before Satan, in the symbolism of the parable. It is a 
real temptation. May a man quietly acquiesce in one shady 
deal of a corporation of which he is a member and thereby 
win a vast fortune to spend for various good enterprises 
for the success of which he is willing to make almost any 
conceivable personal sacrifice? Jesus’ reply was that a 
man should never do anything else than worship God. 
“Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt 
thou serve.” His only course is to do right now, to be 
honest now. He must make no complaisant compromise 
with evil. 

Some of the concrete forms in which this temptation 
appealed to Jesus are to be discerned in his subsequent 
career. He refused to make any compromise with the 
scribes. If no such startling demonstration of power as 
he had contemplated in the second temptation was to be 
made, then he must win his way to world dominion by 
personal influence. First of all he would have to become 
influential among his own people, and the dominant force 
there was the scribes. As appears later, they would have 


Periop oF Dirricurit Drcision q9 


been glad to endorse him and utilize the ability he im- 
mediately began to show if he would have compromised 
with them at certain points that seemed to him vital. 
Might he not do so for a time and afterward all the more 
effectively push on to the attainment of his real ends? 
Must he not compromise with the priests, overlook their 
abuses of the temple administration for a while, be rec- 
ognized by them as a valuable man of great ability, become 
the confidential friend of Annas, Caiaphas, and the Roman 
procurator, and then utilize his position for the furtherance 
of his high purposes? Or, on the other hand, must he 
not acquiesce in the military Messianism of Judas and 
Saddouk or their successors for a time, win their sup- 
port and afterward try to turn it to the accomplishment 
of his great moral ambitions? For all this his answer was 


that he must simply be true to his best vision now and 


all the time, taking whatever consequences might come. 

With the settling of this last question ?® he felt that 
the struggle was for the present over. He was victor and, 
in the language of the parable, with consciousness of a 
victor’s superiority over the vanquished, ordered his an- 
tagonist to leave the field: “Get thee hence, Satan.” | 
These temptations may sometimes have returned and other 
temptations surely arose as the situation developed. Luke 


implies this when he says that the devil “departed from 


him for a season.” 1° 

During these days in the wilderness Jesus passed 
through a profound religious experience which may well 
have deepened the lines in his face and set a great pur- 
pose more firmly in his soul. The things that became clear 
were that he was resolved at any cost to obey God, that 
his primary purpose would be to bring men into fellow- 


* Luke arranges the temptations in a different order. 
ik. 1V.:13. | 


80 Tur Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


ship with God so that they should be always listening to 
his voice, that he could make no startling announcement 
of Messianic mission or even be sure that his mission was 
Messianic, and that he would make no compromise with . 
any form of evil, however expedient it might seem to be to 
do so. Important questions regarding his future remained 
unanswered. He had yet to feel his way along as God 
should open the path before him. 


CHAPTER VIII 


JESUS THE GREATER SUCCESSOR OF THE 
PROPHET JOHN; FAMOUS PROPHET AND 
HEALER THROUGHOUT GALILEE 


HE account of Jesus’ forty days in the wilderness 
is immediately followed in our oldest Gospel by 
the statement that “after John was delivered up,! 

Jesus came into Galilee preaching the gospel of God and 
saying, “The time is fulfilled and the Kingdom of God 
is at hand: repent ye and believe in the gospel.” 2 What 
Jesus did between the time of his wilderness experience 
and John’s imprisonment is not clear from the first three 
Gospels. By his experience at baptism and in the 


“Delivered up” might mean executed as in Rom. IV:25, but 
means imprisoned here, since he appears later as a prisoner (Mt. 
X1I:2). He attacked Herod publicly for scandalous conduct in his 
family affairs, was arrested and after a time of imprisonment was 
executed (Mk. VI:17-29). It seems to be assumed in Mark that 
the readers already know about John’s being delivered up, or that 
someone is at hand to explain it to them. The Gospel was not 
written for those who were wholly dependent on it for information. 

7 Mk. I:14-15. 

?In the Fourth Gospel, which differs from the first three in its 
general viewpoint and method of presentation (p. 21), John the 
Baptist points out Jesus, The Word made flesh, the Messianic Lamb 
of God, to some of his disciples, who instantly abandon John and 
join Jesus. Jesus without any previous activity calls on certain 
others to follow him and is at once possessed of a body of “disciples.” 
He very soon proceeds with them to make his appearance at the 
great national festival in Jerusalem. There he at once takes author- 
itative possession of the temple, performs “signs” which captivate 


81 


82 Tue Lirz anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


wilderness God seemed to have withdrawn him from the 
-following of John the Baptist where he had in humility 
been ready to take his place. In faithfulness to the convic- 
tion that God was laying upon him the responsibility of 
higher leadership he could not work under John the 
‘Baptist. On the other hand his respect for John and his 
movement was so great that he could not do anything that 
would seem like rivaling John or distracting attention from 
him and his movement. But so soon as John’s work 
stopped Jesus was instantly free to begin. 

In his work he was both like and unlike John. He 
was less irregular and picturesque than John. He wore 
no weird dress. He did not stay in the wilderness engaged 
in fasting and prayers, but he utilized the synagogue which 
brought him to the social center of every community. He 
uttered no impassioned harangues, but “taught” more 
quietly. Yet he was like John in the assertion of a 
prophet’s authority. In his synagogue teaching he did 
not cite the names of great rabbinic scholars for this or 
that opinion regarding the meaning of scripture: “they 
were astonished at his teaching for he taught them as 
having authority and not as the scribes.”* The sub 
stance of his message too was like that of John. He went 
before synagogue audiences all over Galilee announcing, 


large numbers in the city full of the Passover crowds, makes a 
leading Pharisee ruler confess that his conversation is too deep for 
him to understand, and carries on a baptizing propaganda that 
entirely overshadows John’s. Then, moved by concern for John’s 
reputation, he travels northward with his disciples, captures for 
himself an entire Samaritan city on the way and, when he reaches © 
Galilee, finds the Galileans eager to receive him because amazed 
at the signs they had seen him do in Jerusalem. After describing 
one “sign” nothing further is said at this point of any activity in 
Galilee; the scene shifts at once again to Jerusalem and thereafter 
little attention is paid to Galilee. 
“ Mk. 1:22. 


Famous GaLiILEaN PrRopHEeT AND HEALER 83 


as John had done in the wilderness of Judea, that the 
time set by God for the dawning of the New Age was 
near. The Kingdom was at hand. Men must prepare for 
its Judgment Day by repenting. There is perhaps less 
amplification of the idea of judgment and more emphasis _ 
on the glad life of the New Age which made its announce- 
ment a “gospel.” The joy of his own present participa- 
tion in the life of the Coming Kingdom filled his soul. 
He felt like a bridegroom in the midst of wedding fes- 
tivities (p. 108). This was an experience fundamentally 
different from that of John. Unlike John he said nothing 
about the coming of a Mightier One. On the other hand 
there was no declaration that he himself was a Mightier 
One. As we have seen, no such consciousness of Mes- 
-sianic leadership had been allowed to develop during the 
time of his temptation. 

In one particular Jesus seemed ae superior to John. 
It soon appeared that he had power to cure disease and 
to free the tortured minds of demoniacs from the power — 
of demons that were understood to have secured housing 
in their bodies. This action of Jesus was thought of as 
a direct attack on the power of Satan, a part of whose 
realm was this world, and who in his reali let his under 
devils loose to roam about among men inflicting disease 
and other injury wherever they could. The evil realm of 
darkness and disease. was expected to disappear whenever 
the light and life of the Kingdom of God should appear. 
This action on the part of Jesus, therefore, seemed like 
the first breath of the New Age. The Kingdom of Géd 
was drawing near. This was not proof that Jesus was 
the Supreme Leader, what many would have called the 
“Messiah.” Even John the Baptist, in his prison, expect- 
ing the Coming One, was not sure that he could draw 
this inference. He sent disciples to Jesus to ask whether 


84 Tur Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


he really was the Coming One or merely his forerunner.® 
But this activity marked Jesus as in some way superior 
to John, as John’s question clearly indicated. 

Jesus’ power over disease and demons is vividly por- . 
trayed in the oldest Gospel. On one occasion® in the 
evening after the sun had set on a Sabbath day and the 
Sabbath was, therefore, ended, the street in front of the 
house where Jesus was staying, so filled up with the sick 
and their friends that the whole city seemed to be there. 
The synagogue audience earlier in the day had been thrown 
into great excitement by the outbreak of a demoniac from 
whom Jesus had quickly expelled the demon. On the 
same day in the house of his host Jesus had taken a 
fever stricken woman by the hand and caused the fever 
instantly to abate. The report of what had happened 
brought the crowds to his door in the evening. Jesus went 
out among the crowds, cured a great many suffering from 
various diseases and expelled many demons.” 

It would be interesting to know how and when Jesus 
first discovered that he had this power and what was his 
religious experience in the exercise of it. In expelling 
demons he did not use any formula of exorcism, as others 
seem to have done who commanded in someone’s powerful 
name that the demon should come out.* He simply ordered 
the demon to come out: “With authority he commandeth 
even the unclean spirits and they obey him’; “He cast 
out the spirits with a word.” ® The only hint he ever 
gave as to his method of accomplishing cures of mind 
and body indicates prayer. “This kind can come out by 

*Mt. XI:3. 

* Mk, 1[:21-34. 

™Mk. 1:34, Mt. VIII:16 “he healed all,” Lk. IV:40 “he laid hig 
hands on every one.” 


®Mk. IX:38, Acts XIX:13-15. 
*Mk. 1:27, Mt. VIII:16. 


Famous GauinEAN PropHet AND HEALER 85 


nothing save by prayer,” he said once when questioned 
by his disciples about his cure of a desperate case of de- 
moniacal possession.1° In the Fourth Gospel’s interpreta- 
tion of his power, prayer is distinctly emphasized as the 
source of it. He is represented as saying at the grave of 
Lazarus. ‘Father, I thank thee that thou heardest me and 
I knew that thou hearest me always.’ 14 As he opened 
to God in prayer a soul that was stirred with compassion 
for those with sick bodies and disordered minds, some- 
thing from the underlying life of God welled up within 
him and passed in accordance with psychic laws into the 
minds, and through the minds into the bodies, of the 
diseased. His most fundamental teaching about prayer, 
which perhaps grew out of such experience, represented 
it to be getting something from God with which to meet 
the need of another man. The classic statement of this 
is the illustration of the man who at midnight knocked 
at his neighbor’s door and said: ‘Friend, lend me three 
loaves; for a friend of mine is come to me from a journey 
and I have nothing to set before him.” +? It was pos- 
sibly his success in curing disease quickly that gave Jesus 
his confidence in the instantaneous response of God to 
his prayer. We find him saying (as it might be trans- 
lated) that if anyone “shall believe that what he is say- 
ing is happening he shall have it.’ 1% This had been his 
experience in healing the sick. The movement toward 
health began on the spot, while he was still praying. If 
he prayed for the curing of someone at a distance he found 
afterward that it had taken place while he prayed, which 


# Mk. IX:29. 
4 Jn. X1I:41-42, 
™ Lk. XI:5-6. 


“Mk. XI:23. The present tenses may be regarded as progressive 
presents. 


86 Tue Lire anp Teacuine or Jesus 


gave him warrant for saying in connection with the ut- 
terance just quoted: “All things whatsoever ye pray and 
ask for believe that ye recewed them and ye shall have 
them.” 1 As will be seen later in the consideration of 
the teaching of Jesus (p. 262), he felt that all the 
power he experienced within himself -was a prophecy 
of that. which would operate in all men in the New 
Age. | 

Jesus’ power in prayer was not the entire explanation 
of his cures. He himself often attributed it to the faith 
of the diseased: ‘Your faith has made you well.” It is 
easy to see what “faith”? would have been in the case of 
the mother-in-law of Peter just cited.1° This woman 
upon whom fever had come was in the attitude of ex- 
pectation. She knew Jesus as a famous prophet, like John 
the Baptist, announcing the nearness of the New Age 
with its health and plenty for all Jews. She knew that 
he had faken her son-in-law into his inner circle of dis- 
ciples. She showed the current confidence in the healing 
power of a prophet’s touch. The psychic conditions of a 
cure were present when Jesus with his prayerful spirit 
came to her, took her hand in his and confidently raised 
her to her feet. 

While the evidence indicates that Jesus prayed in con- 
nection with curing diseases of mind and body, another 
phase of his religious experience is also emphasized in 
this connection. He seems to have recognized within him- 
self a certain Power for which he felt an awesome rever- 
ence. As we shall see later, he spoke of it in a discus- 
sion with the scribes regarding his ability to order demons 
out of human bodies. This Power he called “the Holy 
Spirit.” Men might speak all sorts of venomous words 


Mk, XI:24; cf. Mt. VIII:5-13. 
® Mk, 1:30-31. 


ee ne ata 


Famous GaLitEaAN Propuet anp HeateR 87 


against anyone else, including himself, according to the 
compiler of Q, and still be freely forgiven by God’s grace, 
but to speak such words against this Power, through whose 
activity within him God answered his prayer for the de- 
moniacs, involved an unspeakable peril.*® 

We naturally ask the question here, What actually hap- 
pened in these cases? That Jesus should have cured cer- 
tain forms of disease in the way indicated above does not 
seem at all improbable. The cases of demoniacal posses- 
sion at first thought present special difficulty, particularly 
because the demoniacs are represented as clearly recogniz- 
ing the Messiahship of Jesus at a time when it was con- 
cealed from normal people. This was not a difficulty for 
the Gospel writers. It was assumed by them that demons 
would have an acquaintance with the beings and activities 
of the unseen world which human beings. do not have, 
and that they would, of course, recognize the real char- 
acter of Jesus, the Son of God. While the psychological 
problems of double personality and other forms of mental 
disease may not yet be fully explained, we move decisively 
away from the supposition, almost axiomatic in Jesus’ day, 
that “devils” get into the bodies of men. How did it come 
to pass then that these demoniacs saw in Jesus “the Holy 
One of God,” come to send them back to the abyss before 
the proper time, that is, the Judgment Day, the time 
when everyone knew that they would have to go back 
where they came from? ‘What have we to do with thee 
Jesus, thou Nazarene? Art thou come to destroy us? I 
know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.” “Art 
thou come hither to torment us before the time?’ *" If. 
we put ourselves back into the thought world in which 
Jesus lived, it is not impossible to see how these ejacula- 


Mt. XII:31-32, Lk. XII:10, Mk. III:28-29. 
Mk, 1:24, Mt. VIII:29, 


88 Tuer Lire ann TERAcHING or JESUS 


tions burst with such force from the lips of men of dis- 
ordered minds. A person would carry over into his de- 
ranged state many ideas that he had held as a sane man. 
All that he had ever believed about the nature of demons, 
their habits and their fate, he would now attribute to the 
demon that he as an insane man supposed to be in his body. 
He took into his own consciousness whatever he supposed 
to be the consciousness of the demon. A man whose hal- — 
lucination consists in thinking himself to be Napoleon 
Bonaparte will talk and act as his historical knowledge of 
Napoleon’s career enables him to know that Napoleon 
would talk and act. The “demoniac” heard many all about 
him talking in an excited way about Jesus, the nearness 
of the Kingdom of God and the Judgment Day. When 
he in the midst of eager listeners heard Jesus himself 
talking authoritatively about this day, he knew how such 
talk would excite the demon that he supposed to be within 
him, for on that day the demon would have to go back 
to the pit. The insane man may have felt Jesus’ psychic 
influence over him with such force as would make him 
suspect that here was the master mind that could dis- 
pose of his demon. Or he may have heard people wonder- 
ing whether Jesus might not turn out to be the Messiah 
as they had wondered about John the Baptist. This con- 
jecture, which the demoniac knew would seem so terrible 
to the demon within him, instantly became a conviction 
and the way was prepared for Jesus to remove the hal- 
lucination by ordering the demon to leave. The demoniac 
knew that the demon must obey. When a few cases of 
cure had occurred and were known to other demoniacs, 
this view of the case would easily become somewhat gen- 
eral among them. Jesus is represented as suppressing the 
recognition of his Messiahship that came from the de- 
moniacs. According to the Gospel writers, this was be- 


Famous Gatingan Propuet ann HEALER 89 


cause he did not wish his Messianic consciousness to be 
generally known; it was to be kept as his own secret.8 
We have supposed that he did not yet know whether the 
sense of Leadership which God had produced within him 
involved “Messiahship” (p. 77), and was unwilling to 
have suggestions made for which God had not yet given 
the warrant. Of course when the Gospel writers looked 
back over this entire period, knowing well who Jesus 
turned out to be, their interpretation of everything be- 
came more precisely Messianic than it would necessarily 
have been at the time. To them later it seemed that Jesus, 
the Messiah, appeared with power to destroy Satan’s em- 
pire, sent the frightened devils fleeing before him and 
repaired the bodies that they had weakened by disease. 
But at the time these inferences would not necessarily have 
been drawn. ‘The people did not draw them.'® Only 
now and then some wondered whether anything like this 
would turn out to be true.?° 

Did Jesus himself believe that demons were present in 
these disordered minds, or did he consciously accommodate 
himself to the hallucination in order more effectively to 
remove it? If he did not believe in the presence of demons 
he took no pains to make that fact evident. The Gospels 
show no sign of suspecting any such disbelief. Jesus’ 
religious and ethical teaching, his teaching about man’s 
relation to God and his fellow men, shows no trace of being 
affected in any vital way by belief or disbelief in the ex- 
istence of demons any more than it might have been af- 
fected by belief or disbelief in the existence of disease 
inicrobes in the air about him. If he did believe in 
them, and they nevertheless do not exist, such belief would 

% Of. Mk. VIIL:27-30. 


1% Mk, VIII :27-28. 
» Of, Mt. XII:22-23. 


90 Tue Lire anp TErAacHInG oF JESUS 


be considered a part of. the genuinely human life that he 
lived in the thought world of his own time, the life that 
because of its genuine human experience has made him 
the source of moral redemption on a world scale. 


| 
| 


CHAPTER Ix 


JESUS THE GREATER SUCCESSOR OF THE 
PROPHET JOHN (Concluded) : TEACHER AND 
PROPHET RATHER THAN HEALER 


N a particular not yet noted Jesus was like John the 
I Baptist. He soon began to form a group of “dis- 
ciples.” As he went from synagogue to synagogue 
with increasing popularity he soon had a wide acquaintance 
from which to select disciples. Such young men as were 
always eager to become the disciples of some distinguished 
rabbi, would naturally welcome the chance to follow a 


teacher so popular as Jesus and possessed of such un- 


usual power to heal disease and expel demons, even if 
he had not himself been taught by any distinguished scribe. 
The Gospels give a very brief account of the choice of 
four men, of whom three later became outstanding char- 
acters among Jesus’ followers.t They were all business 


men like Jesus himself. They were engaged in the fish 
_ business which took its place with agriculture and gen- 


eral trade as a leading industry in the country about the 

Sea of Galilee. Fish in large quantities were salted and 

sold for export as well as for the home market. He found 

these four men, two pairs of brothers, at their work on the 

shore of the Sea of Galilee, and proposed to them to come 

with him. They evidently knew him? and understood 
1Mk. I:16-20. 


4 According to John’s Gospel at least two of them had been asso- 
ciated with him before this in Judaea, Jn. 1:40-41. 


91 


92 THE Lire ann TEACHING OF JESUS 


that his proposition involved at least the temporary aban- 
donment of business. The form of his invitation was 
significant. In a half humorous, yet profoundly earnest, 
way he said: “Come with me and I will give you a 
chance to fish for men!” They were evidently to help 
him get the nation ready for the coming Kingdom of 
God.* To what extent John the Baptist’s disciples had 
helped their leader make his proclamation we do not know, 
but in the course of no very long time Jesus used 
his own disciples to help him spread his message in 
all the Galilean towns. Two of the four men were 
Simon, afterward called by Jesus Simon Peter, and 
his brother Andrew, householders in Capernaum, a thriv- 
ing business city on the north shore of the lake. It was 
to their house that Jesus went together with the other 
two men, James and John, on a Sabbath after the notable 
synagogue service mentioned in the last chapter, and about 
their house that the crowds of sick people gathered in the 
evening. 

The point to be emphasised here is that Jesus at this 
time, according to the oldest Gospel, seemed very unwilling 
to let his dealing with disease proceed beyond a certain 
point. Early in the morning after the evening in which 
he had cured so many sick, before the rest of the house- 
hold were awake, he slipped out of the city to a quiet spot 


*?Lk. V:1-11, presents a different account of Jesus’ calling Peter 
and his associates, according to which Jesus uses Peter’s boat to 
preach from (cf. Mk. IV:1). He secures for them after the preach- 
ing an immense catch of fish which makes Peter confess himself a 
sinner. Something like this appears in Jn. XXI, but then after the 
resurrection of Jesus, when Peter, who had denied Jesus at the 
time of his trial, might be expected to feel himself guilty as no 
others in the boat according to Luke do. Apparently various ver- 
sions of interviews between Jesus and Peter the fisherman were 
current (cf. Lk. I:1-4), and Luke seems. to have taken one or 
more of them for combination with the Mark narrative. 


a — it ie 


TEACHER AND PropuetT Ratuer THAN Heater 93 


for prayer.* Soon after, before the heat of the day began, 
the street in front of the house began to fill up again with 
the sick and those who were curious to see the prophet deal 
with them. Simon and the others discovered in some way 
where to look for Jesus and hurried out after him to bring 
him back to the waiting crowds. They found that he was 
unwilling to go back. He had slipped away not intending 
to come back, perhaps in anticipation of just such a popu- 
lar demand for him. He said that he must preach in 
the neighbouring towns and had left the house in the very 
early morning to begin such a preaching tour (v. 38). 
His sense of obligation to make his message known was 
decidedly stronger than his natural inclination to cure 
more sick people.© What he had prayed about in the 
morning twilight we should be glad to know. Perhaps 
the experience of the evening before had produced a re- 
currence of his earlier temptation, his inclination to let 
the relief of physical distress take precedence over the 
moral appeal. That this was the case seems probable in 
view of the peculiar behavior attributed to Jesus by 
the oldest Gospel in a case of sickness singled out for 
special description. The sick man had leprosy. If we 
follow the Biblical description of leprosy in Leviticus 
XITI-XIV, it appears that the disease was not always 
what is now called leprosy, but instead a skin disease which 
appeared and sometimes after a while disappeared. It was 
thought to be similar in nature to certain discolorations 
sometimes appearing on the walls of houses, on leather 

4Mk. 1:35-38, 

*Luke’s Gospel (IV:42-43) intensifies Mark’s account. The 
crowds came to him and laid hold of him to keep him from leaving 
them, but he told them that it was necessary to preach the Gospel 
of the Kingdom of God in other cities, that it was for this purpose 


that he had been “sent’”—presumably by God—into public life. 
* Mk. 1:41-45, Mt. VIII:1-4, Lk. V:12-16. 


94 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


articles and in woolen and linen garments. It was con- 
sidered contaminating and necessitated the isolation of 
whatever was infected. Such an isolated person for some 
reason had courage to come directly to Jesus. He ex- 
pressed the conviction that if Jesus were willing to do 
so he could cure him. According to the reading of certain 
manuscripts of Mark’s Gospel Jesus became “angry” at 
this point.’ All manuscripts from this point on agree 
that Jesus said he was willing, and touched him (in spite 
of the defilement). Mark’s Gospel (alone) adds, appar- 
ently in the spirit of the word “angered,” that Jesus in 
great agitation “thrust him forth,” or urged him off (the 
same word in Mk. 1:13, “the Spirit driveth him forth 
into the wilderness’). All three Gospels say that he was 
given strict instructions not to mention his cure to anyone, 
but to make the journey to Jerusalem, show himself to the 
priest who had ways of telling when a man’s leprosy had 
really disappeared, make the offering required by the law 
in such cases and get a clean bill of health that would let 
him back into community life. A natural explanation of 
this strange language is that Jesus was greatly disturbed 
by the extent to which the healing of disease seemed likely 
to interfere-with his preaching the Coming Kingdom. The 
reason that this so profoundly agitated him was that, as 
we have supposed, he had in the time of his temptation 
recognized this very thing as a device of Satan to defeat 
the great work for which God was making him responsible, 
namely, the moral preparation of the nation for the Com- 


™The word “angered” was evidently offensive and early copyists 
took the liberty to replace it by “had compassion.” Matthew and 
Luke, who are supposed to have been using Mark, have no word at 
all here, which seems to indicate that the word meaning “in com- 
passion” had not yet displaced “angered” and that they both shrank 
from using the offensive word. They both also omit the other strong 
language in v. 43 of Mark. 


TEACHER AND Propurr Ratner THAN HEALER 95 


ing Kingdom of God. His situation was somewhat like 
that of an army surgeon who is charged with the responsi- 
bility of personally bringing exceedingly important in- 
formation to headquarters and who yet finds himself in a 
situation in which all his time is occupied by wounded 
men demanding surgical attention, and who suspects that 
this situation has come about through the sly manipulation 
of. some sinister influence. The failure of this cured 
leper to do what Jesus told him to do, keep his cure secret, 
did actually make it impossible for Jesus to preach in 
towns for a time. He had to go out into the fields, away 
from cities, where sick people could not so easily be 
brought, and preach there to such as came: “But he went 
out and began to publish it much, and to spread abroad 
the matter, insomuch that Jesus could no more openly 
enter into a city, but was without in desert places, and 
they came to him from every quarter.” § 

A case of healing that probably occurred about this time 
in Capernaum is reported in the Matthew and Luke Gos- 
pels,® not in Mark. An army officer of sergeant’s rank 
(“centurion”) had a servant to whom he was strongly at- 
tached. The servant was a paralytic and in terrible dis- 
tress (at the point of death, Lk.). According to the 
Matthew Gospel the officer went to Jesus asking for help 
and to his surprise Jesus at once volunteered to go to his 
house although it was the house of a Gentile which a 
Jew would not naturally care to enter. The Luke account 
represents him to be a Jehovah worshipping Gentile (not 
a proselyte) and one who had been rich enough and devout 
enough to build a Jewish synagogue in the city. In Luke 
it is not the man himself, but the elders of this synagogue, 
followed later by a group of the officer’s “friends,” who 


®Mk. 1:45. 
°Mt. VIII:5-13, Lk. VII:1-10. 


96 Tus Lire ann TEACHING oF JESUS 


intercede with Jesus. In both accounts the man recognizes 
the fact that Jesus would not naturally wish to enter his 
house and suggests that Jesus at a distance can order the 
disease, or perhaps the demon who is “tormenting” (Mt.) 
the sick man, to leave just as the officer himself is ac- 
customed to produce results at a distance by giving 
orders to his servants. Jesus was greatly astonished 
(“marvelled”) to find such faith exhibited by a foreigner 
and instantly gave assurance that the sick man would be 
found cured. This turned out to be so. It is to be sup- 
posed that the man shared his master’s confidence in 
Jesus’ power to cure disease and had the expectation of 
recovery that was an essential element in “‘faith.” Jesus 
expressed the conviction that this was an indication of 
what would happen on a large scale later; many foreigners 
would be found feasting in the Kingdom of God with Abra- 
ham, Isaac and Jacob. 

In all this period Jesus said nothing in public about 
any sense of supreme leadership, neither, so far as the 
first three Gospels show, did he say anything about it 
to the four men who were working with him. We are 
left to infer that they were glad to work with him simply 
because of their interest in the Coming Kingdom and be- 
cause of the honor of working with so distinguished a 
prophet, just as had been the case with the disciples of 
John the Baptist. 

It is also to be noted that in all this period Jesus’ 
popularity was very great. No opposition on the part of 
the scribes seems to have developed. They may have felt 
somewhat disturbed to find a religious teacher not of 
their class so popular. They were however in sympathy 
with his desire to get people to repent in order to bring 
on the Kingdom of God. He had seemed to share their 
desire to see the law of Moses universally obeyed. He 


TEACHER AND Propuet RatHerR THAN HeEateR 97 


had required the leper to show himself to the priest and 
punctiliously obey the leper law that God had enacted 
through Moses. It seemed probable that they could utilize 


the great influence Jesus was acquiring for the furtherance 
of their own highest aims. 


CHAPTER X 


JESUS’ CONFLICT WITH THE SCRIBES: THE 
FORGIVENESS OF SINS AND INTIMACY 
WITH SINNERS 


HE truthfulness of the portrait of “the scribes” 
or “the scribes of the Pharisees” presented in the 
Gospels is often denied by Jewish writers. Doubt- 

less the long line of Jewish teachers during a period of 
1,900 years has presented various types of character, both 
agreeable and repulsive. One type may have characterized 
one period and a very different type another. This could 
certainly be said of the long line of Christian theologians 
and ecclesiastical leaders during the same 1,900 years. 
One who would attempt a fair judgment of the Pharisaism 
of Jesus’ day is embarrassed by the fact that it expressed 
itself in no contemporary literature of its own. The 
Christian Gospels are our main nearly contemporary 
source and they were produced in the midst of a con- 
flict between the Christian church and the Jewish syna- 
gogue. Jewish literature begins some two centuries later, 
although it records fragmentary sayings and traditions 
handed down orally and probably accurately from Jesus’ 
day. Since they are so fragmentary the absence from them 
of some disagreeable Pharisaic trait found in the Gospel 
portrait is no proof that such a trait was not to be found 
in the days of Jesus. The assumption on which the pres- — 
ent discussion proceeds is that since Jesus attacked the 
98 


ForGIvENESS AND IntTIMACY wiTH SINNERS 99 


weak points of Pharisaism and Pharisees (pp. 30-33). 
those to whom these weak points meant most, and who 
happened to be in the positions of leadership that seem 
often to be held by such, sprang to the front in their 
defense and were, therefore, the prominent figures in the 
Gospel picture. The better Pharisaism stayed in the 
obscure background. It may be that these prominent 
figures are painted in somewhat darker colors and with 
heavier hand than would have been used if the Gospels 
had not been produced in the heat of a conflict. But 
the treatment which they represent Jesus to have received 
from the scribes is not very different from that usually 
accorded spiritual enthusiasm by the extremely formalistic 
element of a religious body that, on the whole, may not 
be adequately represented by the hard formalists. 

The oldest Gospel presents a series of vividly drawn 
pictures in which the growing hostility between Jesus and 
the scribes appears.1 The first? is that of a paralytic. 
to whom Jesus authoritatively announced the forgiveness 
of his sins. The man lived in Capernaum. When Jesus 
ventured back again into the city after a period of field 
preaching he apparently established week day teaching 
headquarters in a private house, presumably that belong- 
ing to his disciples, Simon and Andrew. The open court 
around which such a house would be built was large 
enough to accommodate a group of considerable size, some 
hundreds if crowded. This paralytic was brought to the 
house by four friends. They found even the covered pas- 
sageway leading from the street into the inner court 
jammed with people listening to “the word,” that is, 
the message about the nearness of the Kingdom of God 
and the way to prepare for it. The five men were per- 


2Mk, II-III, VII:1-24. 
*Mk, I:1-12. 


100 Tue Lirr anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


haps fearful that Jesus would slip away immediately after 
preaching as he had done before, without waiting to cure 
the sick. They decided to take no chances. The four 
men carried their sick friend by an outside stair-way 
up to the roof, removed a portion of the roof that was 
easily displaced and lowered him on his cot close to the 
place where Jesus was standing. A remarkable conversa- 
tion, or monologue, then followed in which Jesus gave the 
incident a religious turn and so made it contribute de- 
cidedly to, instead of interfere with, his main purpose, 
the moral preparation of the nation for the New Age. 
Jesus’ first words to him assured him that his sins were 
forgiven, that he was ready for the New Age and its 
Judgment Day. Jesus had probably been talking about 
repenting of sin in order to be ready, and here was a man 
who was ready! How did Jesus know it? The narrative 
says it was because he saw their “faith.” “Jesus seeing 
their faith, saith unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy 
sins are forgiven.” He read in the faces of the five men 
that for which his eye was always searching. the faces of 
men. The fact that they had come to him, the prophet of 
repentance, with such a light in their eyes might seem 
evidence of their repentance. But Jesus went on to 
speak of an especial sense of authority that he felt within 
him. It was not simply that he could say what any — 
righteous man would say, namely, that if a man has 
sincerely repented of his sins, it is certain that God has 
forgiven him. Such a general assumption underlay the 
message of John the Baptist and of all preachers of 
righteousness. Jesus seemed to have power to look into 
the man’s soul, to feel the man repenting and to feel rising | 
within himself the forgiving, approving love of God for 
the penitent man. As he could perhaps feel the tide 
* Mk, 1:36-38. 


ForaivENEss AND InTIMAacy wiTH Sinners 101 


of life and health rising within him to affect the dis- 
eased minds and bodies about him,‘ so here he felt the 
loving energy of God moving through him toward this 
man, of whose penitent faith he saw such convincing evi- 
dence. He felt God forgiving the man’s sin. 

The emphasis on “faith” here in this religious experi- 
ence is the same that will be found appearing later in 
the case of certain remarkable cures of disease. It seems 
to describe a state of mind, or rather of the whole being, 
in which the person exercising it reaches out to work with 
the unseen energy of God in penitent good will and to the 
utmost for the accomplishment of whatever God wishes 
to have done. 

As Jesus talked with the man about the forgiveness of 
his sins, on which the man’s paralysis had given him time 
and occasion to reflect,® he felt the impulse to cure rising 
within him. What the exact nature of the disease was is 
of course not evident. It was something that kept the 
man from walking, but in response to the sudden definite 
summons to get up and carry his cot home, the man 
found energy released within him with which to do it. 
He made his way through the excited crowd to the 
street, joined his four happy friends outside and went 
home. | 

This was apparently the beginning of hostility to Jesus 
on the part of the scribes, some of whom were present.® 
Jesus’ conduct furnished indication of irregularity and in- 
dependence, of a possible assumption of superiority to 
tradition that might make him unmanageable and, because 
of his popularity, dangerous to religion. He was assuming 

“Mk. V:30. 


' Disease was sometimes thought to be punishment for sin, cf. 
Jn. TX:1. , 


*Lk. V:17 represents them to have gathered apparently by pre- 
vious arrangement from all over Galilee, Judea and Jerusalem. 


102 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


an intimacy with God, an ability to speak for God, that 
seemed to them exceedingly irreverent. The feeling did 
not reach the point of open expression at the time, but 
Jesus is said to have recognized its existence and to have 
met it without flinching by proceeding to perform the 
cure which he felt himself empowered to undertake. He 
assured them that God was not displeased with him for 
speaking as he had about forgiveness of sins and that he 
felt sure God would show his endorsement of what had 
been said by empowering him to cure the man’s paralysis. 
How the scribes answered this logic does not appear here, 
but we have a suggestion later of what they might have 
said. 

In this statement Jesus is represented to have called 
himself “the Son of Man.” As we have seen (p. 41) this 
seems to have been used as a Messianic title at least in 
.certain circles. The many who may not have accepted 
the Son of Man conception of Messiahship would none 
the less recognise it as one of several Messianic titles. 
But Jesus is represented in the Gospels as wishing to 
conceal any Messianic consciousness that he may have 
had.* Therefore it does not seem possible that he should 
have used the title here. The Gospel makers may have 
placed it on his lips here by a chronological inadvertence, 
since it will appear to be the title that he later applied 
to himself in the privacy of the inner circle. None of 
the Gospels represents anyone present on this occasion 
to have thought of Jesus as the Messiah.® It is entirely 
possible that in the Aramaic speech which lies behind our 
Greek Gospels a phrase was used which would yield the 
meaning “man” as well as be the suggestion of the tech- 
nical title “Son of Man.” In that case Jesus’ statement 


™Mk. 1:34, III:12, VIIT:27. 
®*Mt. IX:8, Mk. II:12, Lk. V:26. 


ForGIVENESS AND INTIMACY WITH SINNERS 103 


here was that man could forgive sins on earth, which he 
proceeded to prove in the manner narrated here. The 
Matthew Gospel represents this to have been what the 
people understood him to mean: “They glorified God who 
had given such authority unto men.” ® In that case this 
would be another expression of Jesus’ confidence that all 
\his powers were prophetic of powers that men in the 
New Age would possess. The Matthew Gospel further 
represents him to have assured his disciples that they would 
all have a somewhat similar power, namely, the power 
of authoritative teaching: ‘“Whatsoever things ye shall | 
bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.” 1° In the 
Fourth Gospel Jesus is represented as expressly saying: 
‘““Whosesoever sins ye forgive they are forgiven unto 
them.” }4 7 3 va 

The second picture which the oldest Gospel draws to 
show the growing nostility of the scribes to Jesus reveals 
him in intimate social relations with those called “‘pub- 
licans and sinners.” 12 These classes have already been 
briefly described (p. 37). Jesus made the acquaintance 
of a tax collector named Levi (Matthew in the Matthew 
Gospel) on the “sea shore.” The audiences which he with 
some regularity “taught” had outgrown the house court 
where the last paragraph represented them to be meeting 
and he had found some available outdoor place near the 
busy life of the lake front. This brought him into the 
vicinity of the collector’s office, situated perhaps on the 
great road running from Damascus to the Mediterranean. 
An acquaintance with the official developed, and Jesus 


found him to be the kind of man he could use in his 
*Mt. IX:8. 
Mt. XVIII:18. 
1 Jn. XX:23; Paul believed that the Christians would share Jesus’ 


power to judge the world and even angels, I Cor. VI:1-2. 


104 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JzESUS 


propaganda throughout the province. He extended to him 
the same sort of invitation he had previously given the 
four fish dealers. It involved resigning or selling out his 
commission as collector. 

The man evidently felt highly honored by receiving 
such an invitation from a distinguished: religious leader. 
It was treatment utterly different from that usually ac- 
corded him by religious people. He closed up his busi- 
ness and accepted. He celebrated the event by giving a 
large dinner party, or “reception” as it is called in Luke’s 
Gospel, to which he invited many of his own class, large 
numbers of whom had been attracted to the addresses 
Jesus had been giving on the lake front. They would 
have felt conspicuous if after long absence they had re- 
appeared in the synagogue service to hear him, but they 
had experienced no such embarrassment in the outdoor 
meeting. 

This dinner was attended also by many of the respect- 
able classes, who had been regular attendants on Jesus’ 
meetings so long that they were coming to be regarded as 
“disciples.” It was an occasion on which they all ate to- 
gether. This was a serious matter because eating together 
“implied personal friendship. Furthermore a publican’s 
or a “sinner’s” table food, especially meat, would probably 
not have been prepared in accordance with the require- 
ments of Moses’ law as interpreted by the scribes. 
The guests too would have come freshly from contact 
with foreigners in all sorts of business relations. There 
would have been nothing of the procedure followed in 
a respectable Pharisee’s home before meals, the careful 
bathing after coming from the market place, the “washing 
of cups, pots and brasen vessels.” +? From the stand- 
point of the Pharisee Jesus, who PuRpGred to be so re- 

¥ Mk. VII:3-4, 


ForGIvENEss AND INTIMACY wiITH SiINNERS 105 


ligious and so solicitous about preparing people for the 
Judgment Day, was actually corrupting the morals of his 
followers and fitting them for damnation in the great day. 
The Pharisaic Messianist, like Rabbi Saul later, felt 
that the hope of securing a law-keeping nation, and so 
preparing the way for the coming of the Messiah and 
his Kingdom, depended on separating the people from 
the evil influences pressing in on the nation from every 
side. To find the prophet Jesus lax at this vital point 
was exceedingly disturbing. They went to his “disciples,” 
those whose morals were being directly corrupted by him, 
and tried to get them out from under his influence: “They 
said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and 
drinketh with publicans and sinners ?”’ 

Jesus’ view of the case was entirely different. What 
seemed to the Pharisees irreligious conduct seemed to him 
to be truly religious. He felt that he was succeeding in 
reaching those whom God wished him to prepare for the 
Judgment Day. The Pharisees were up to this point, so 
far as he had reason to suppose, respectably righteous. 
His chief business was with those who were evidently 
not righteous, publicans and sinners. He was like a 
surgeon on the battlefield after a battle, concerned only 
with the wounded. ‘The Pharisees probably would not 
have objected to this view of the case. Their objection 
was to his method of procedure. They would have been 
glad to have publicans and sinners reform, but to try to. 
secure this result by social friendship with them seemed 
absolutely wrong and irreligious. Jesus, who in all his 
intercourse with this class felt the life of God within 
him, judged that God was on terms of social intimacy 
with publicans and sinners. Perhaps Jesus to some ex- 
tent learned this from experience. He saw how quickly 
recoverable such persons as Levi were through friendly 


106 Tue Lire anp Tracuine or JxEsus 


approach. From what seemed to be the wreckage of a 
human life he saw something rise up with a glad sense 
of opportunity and strong moral ambition at the unosten- 
tatious coming of a righteous friend. 


CHAPTER XI 


JESUS’ CONFLICT WITH THE SCRIBES (Con- 
tinued): FASTS AND THE SABBATH 


S time passed it became more and more evident 
A to the scribes that Jesus was moving away from 

their idea of religion to one so different that it 
seemed to them actively irreligious. It seems necessary 
to suppose that Jesus’ conduct had not always been what 
it was now becoming. If he had always been lax on the 
points brought up in this series of incidents the critical 
spirit of the scribes would have appeared earlier. Jesus’ 
new responsibility for religious leadership may have forced 
upon him the necessity of deciding at what points he would 
endorse, and at what points he would ignore or oppose, 
the rules of conduct prescribed by the rabbis in their in- 
terpretation of the law. 

The third step in the growing antagonism was taken 
in connection with fasting. Fasting seemed to the scribes 
to be such a penitent expression of humility and guilt as 
would hasten the Messiah’s coming to bring in the King- 
dom of God. Mondays and Thursdays? were agreed upon 
as days when men might fast with the wholesome con- 
sciousness that many others were associated with them in 
the act. Perhaps some extremely pious persons fasted 
every week on these days, like the Pharisee in Luke’s 


*Mk. IT:18-22. 
*Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, ch. VIII. 


107 


108 Tue Lire anp Tracuinea oF Jzsus 


Gospel ® who said: “I fast twice in the week.” It had 
seemed to John the Baptist that the practice was very 
suitable for the days just before the Judgment. But 
Jesus was notorious for his neglect of this custom. His 
disciples, especially among the publicans and sinners, 
were as apt to have dinner parties on Mondays and Thurs- 
days as on other days. Finally John’s disciples united 
with the Pharisees in a definite protest.made to Jesus 
himself. How could one who purported to be preparing 
the nation for the coming Kingdom neglect this funda- 
mental religious practice! Jesus defended himself by. say- 
ing that fasting on the part of his disciples was utterly 
unsuitable to the circumstances in which they were living, 
as unsuitable as it would be for the near friends of a 
bridegroom to fast during the wedding days. During 
this week, when all sorts of feasting, sports and enter- 
tainments were being arranged, it would be utterly absurd 
for the principal entertainers to fast! The apparently 
obvious inference from this illustration was that Jesus 
considered himself to be the central figure in a situation 
made joyous by his presence for all connected with him. 
He had the glad sense of being appointed by God to leader- 
ship in the most inspiring enterprise that the Jewish mind 
could conceive; he was able to go about expelling demons, 
curing the sick, everywhere bringing gladness and hope. 
Under such circumstances how could his disciples fast! 
It would wreck their religious experience to try to ex- 
press the tumultuous joy that filled their hearts by somber 
fasting. It would be as disastrously incongruous as it 
would be to put a patch of unshrunk flannel on an old well 
shrunk flannel garment. The garment would be ruined 
in the first washing. This illustration appealed to the 


women in his audiences (he probably discussed this well 
* XVIII: 12. 


Fasts AND THE SABBATH 109 


known criticism publicly and on a number of occasions). 
Another illustration appealed to farmers. It would be 
like putting fresh unfermented wine into old wine skins 
already stretched to the limit. When fermentation began 
the wine skins and their contents would be a total loss.* 

Jesus is represented to have implied that fasting would 
not always be so disastrous, that he, perhaps like John 
the Baptist, would be either imprisoned or executed, and 
that then fasting would be in order, for his disciples as it 
was now for the disciples of John: “There will come 
days when the bridegroom will be taken from them; then 
will they fast in that day.” It is not impossible that this 
prediction was inserted here by the compiler of the 
Gospel, as in accord with the expectation of death char- 
acteristic of Jesus’ later teaching. If not, then there was 
even now a foreboding of trouble ahead in the heart of 
Jesus. Such a foreboding may have been one of the 
things that made it difficult for him to see just what was 
- involved in his clear sense of leadership and that perhaps 
made him unwilling to adopt definitely any of the current 
ideas of Messiahship. He perhaps was waiting for God 
to make the future clearer to him. 

The next step in the developing antagonism between 
Jesus and the scribes was regarding a point that seemed 
to the Pharisees to be very vital, the keeping of the Sab- 
bath. All the laws, to be sure, were of vital importance, 
for they were all the gift of God from heaven, described 
the life of heaven (God himself had stopped his work 
and “rested” on the seventh day), and prescribed the sort 

*Lk. V:36-39 varies the illustration of the patch in such a way 
as to emphasize still more both incongruousness and destruction. 
Two garments are ruined and the two kinds of cloth do not har- 
monize. He also adds a sentence which apologizes for the prefer- 


ence which John’s disciples feel for the old custom of fasting: 
“anyone likes old wine better than new!” 


110. £=‘Txue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


of life on earth that would make men fit for, and able to 
feel at home in, the Kingdom of Heaven. It was easy 
to see, however, that the immediate consequences of dis- 
obedience were more serious in the case of some laws than - 
in the case of others. Disobedience to the food laws, for 
instance, broke down the barrier between the social life of 
Jews and foreigners and so led easily to intermarriage 
and to all the consequent contagion of pagan religion. 
Disobedience to the Sabbath law also led easily to freer 
intercourse with, and contamination from, foreigners. 
Jewish idleness on every seventh day marked the Jew 
as peculiar and often made him unpopular among 
foreigners.> He could not be found at his place of busi- 
ness on that day, nor among other workmen, however 
much his employer might need his services. But more 
important than this social isolation secured by Sabbath 
keeping was the fact that a whole day was secured each 
week for the study of the law in the synagogue and at 
home. This most of all tended to keep the Jews’ reli- 
gious life free from all the evil foreign influences about it. 
It is not strange, therefore, that the scribes exerted them- 
selves to the utmost to imagine all sorts of situations that 
might arise in the life of the people and to explain, with 
what seems to us absurd attention to detail, exactly how 
the Sabbath law applied to each. It was sometimes felt 
that if only two successive Sabbaths were kept by the 
nation, just as the scribes directed, it would bring national 
redemption.® Therefore, when Jesus was discovered to 
be out of sympathy with the effort:of the scribes to en- 
force Sabbath keeping, he naturally seemed to them to 
be a most serious menace to religion. 

In the oldest Gospel two cases of conflict over this point 


5 Juvenal, Sat. XIV. 
* Weber, Die Lehren des Talmud, p. 334, quoting Sabbath Tract. 


Fasts AND THE SABBATH 111 


are described’? which resulted in the determination of 
the Pharisees to bring formal charges against Jesus in 
the proper court and, if possible, to secure a death sen- 
tence.® 

Before considering these two cases in detail, the exact 
point at issue between Jesus and the scribes should be 
noted. The scribes held that only what was absolutely 
necessary for the preservation of life, or the prevention 
of great suffering, or the avoidance of extreme inconven- 
ience, should be done on the Sabbath. Whatever could be 
done on some other day should be put off. Jesus on the 
other hand held that whatever contributed to the real wel- 
fare of men might be done on the Sabbath and need not 
be postponed until the next day. This exact issue comes 
out clearly in a scene described by Luke.® A woman who 
for eighteen years had not been able to stand erect ap- 
peared in the synagogue on the Sabbath and was cured 
by Jesus. The ruler of the synagogue became very in- 
dignant because Jesus had not waited a day. He stated 
his case with great force to the audience: “The ruler of 
the synagogue being moved with indignation because Jesus 
had healed on the Sabbath answered and said to the multi- 
tude. There are six days in which men ought to work; 
in them, therefore, come and be healed and not on the 
day of the Sabbath.” Jesus’ retort was that they were 
more merciful to their live stock than they were to human 
beings. They did not make a thirsty ox wait for water 
until the Sabbath was over; why should they make this 
“daughter of Abraham” wait for healing? 

This is the point at issue in the two typical cases cited 


™Mk, II:23-II1:6. 

® Mk. III:6. 

°Lk. XIII:10-17. See I. Abrahams, Studies in Pharisaism and 
the Gospels, pp. 129-135. 


112 Tus Lire anp TracuHina or JESUS 


by Mark. In the first one while Jesus and a group cf 
his disciples were passing by a grain field, some of his 
disciples, who were hungry, “‘harvested” and “threshed” a 
few handfuls of grain which Jesus and his disciples ate. 
This seemed to certain Pharisees, who either saw it or 
heard of it, to be a clear case of Sabbath breaking. When 
they called Jesus to account for letting his disciples set 
such an example to the people, he defended himself by 
citing what David had allowed his young men to do when 
they were hungry, namely break the law regarding the 
use of holy tabernacle bread. A company of them under 
his leadership, setting out suddenly on an expedition that 
need not be described here, appeared at the tabernacle 
and asked the high priest for bread. He had only Je 
hovah’s sacred bread—priests’ food according to the law— 
but he gave it to them at David’s request. Neither David’s 
young men nor Jesus’ disciples were in desperate need. 
Both groups were hungry but they could have gone hungry 
for hours without running any serious risk, and could 
presumably have secured food in some other way within 
a short time. Jesus’ point seems to be that David in- 
terpreted the priests’ bread law in a rather common sense 
way, which made it justifiable to use the bread for other 
persons when to do so would help a worthy cause. Jesus 
assumed that the situation in which he was leading a com- 
pany of young men about, authoritatively proclaiming the 
nearness of the Kingdom of God, was, to say the least, 
as important as that in which David found himself. This 
comparison of the two situations made it natural later 
for the Gospel makers to see here a covert comparison 
between David, who was to be the Lord’s anointed King, 
and Jesus, the Messianic Lord’s Anointed. The Matthew 
Gospel attributes to Jesus another comparison, particu- 
larly effective with Palestinian Jews. The priests carry 


Fasts AND THE SABBATH 113 


burdens and do other work on the Sabbath which it would 
be unlawful for other men to do, but which is lawful for 
them because done in the service of the temple. Then 
follows the statement that “something !° greater than the 
temple is here.” This means that the situation created by 
Jesus, in which his disciples were employed, was greater 
than the temple. The sentence added in all three Gospels, 
“and so Lord is the Son of Man even of the Sabbath,” 
may be an explanatory sentence that originated with the 
early expounders of Jesus’ teaching. If it came from 
Jesus himself it is not in its original form, for, at a time 
when he was careful not to express a Messianic conscious- 
ness, he would not have publicly called himself by the Mes- 
sianic title “Son of Man.” As was said (p. 102) regarding 
the occurrence of this title in Mk. I1:12, the phrase in 
Aramaic might have meant “man,” in which case the 
meaning would be that man, enlightened and spiritualized 
man in the New Age, would have authority to use the 
Sabbath as he should see fit. This accords well with the 
sentence just preceding it, found in Mark only, which 
says that “the Sabbath was made for man.” This latter 
‘sentence is also found in the early tradition of the 
scribes,41 although their extreme exaltation of the law 
made it also easy to think of the creation of man as a 
result of God’s desire to have someone to obey his Sab- 
bath law. 

_ The second case cited by Mark is a synagogue scene. 
A workman with a “withered” hand, and so in danger 
of becoming a pauper, was present. <A fragment of the 
lost Gospel according to the Hebrews, represents him 
to have been a mason of independent spirit and to have 
said to Jesus: “I was a mason seeking my living by my 


*Not “some one,” see R.V. margin. 
*% Abrahams, Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels, p. 129, 


114 Tue Lirgz anp TRACHING oF JESUS 


hands. I beseech thee, Jesus, to restore health to me that 
I may not wretchedly beg for my food.” Jesus, himself 
a workman, knew what a terrible disaster the loss of a 
hand was. ‘There were scribes present also, apparently 
already aroused by Jesus’ previous conduct on the Sab- 
bath, and expecting that something would happen in this 
service which would be ground for a formal charge against 
him. Jesus accepted the challenge of the situation. It 
was another chance, like the cure of the paralytic to 
make the healing of disease contribute to, rather than 
interfere with, the success of his teaching about the na- 
ture of true righteousness, true fitness for the Judgment 
Day and the life of the New Age. He asked the man to 
stand up. Then, turning to the scribes in the “chief 
“seats,” he asked them with something of irony whether 
it was ‘lawful’ on the Sabbath to do such good as he 
was proposing to do to this man or such harm as they 
were planning in their hearts to do to himself, to save 
this man’s life by fitting him to earn his living again or 
to destroy life as they were planning to destroy his own 
life. They were silent. For a moment he looked at them 
man by man with rising “anger,” pained by their hard 
hearted indifference to the crippled workman’s condition. 
Meanwhile in the crippled man who stood waiting, expec- 
tation, or “faith,” rose to its height and when Jesus spoke 
the sharp incisive word, “Put out your hand!” something 
within him was released and his hand was again respon- 
sive to his will. 

The climax had come. The scribes went out to prepare 
formal charges against Jesus which would lead to his 
execution. They tried to enlist the so-called Herod party. 
Who “the Herodians” were is not clear. Presumably 
they were an organization of those upon whose assistance 
Herod relied in his vigilant effort to keep his territory in 


Fasts AND THE SappaTH 115 


order and so to keep himself in favor with the Roman au- 
thorities. If so, the scribes must have represented that the 
great popularity of Jesus made him politically dangerous. 
Nothing seems to have resulted from this effort at 
the time. Herod already had one popular prophet in 
prison, John the Baptist, and he probably thought it in- 
expedient to lay hands on another just then. This was 
a movement on the part of the local Capernaum or Galilean 
scribes and not so serious as the movement of larger dimen- 
sions later among the Jerusalem scribes. 


CHAPTER XII 


JESUS’ CONFLICT WITH THE SCRIBES 
(Concluded) : 


VERDICT OF THE JERUSALEM SCRIBES AND 
_ JESUS’ ATTACK ON THE TRADITION 


prosecute Jesus was not carried out, their opposi- 

tion probably prejudiced the very conservative 
element of the synagogue constituency against him. After 
this time he is never, in Mark’s Gospel, found in a syna- 
gogue except once in Nazareth. This may be simply 
because Mark had no more occasion to mention synagogues, 
or it may be that by an understanding among the syna- 
gogue rulers of Galilee platform privileges were to be 
thereafter denied to Jesus. In any case he was still a 
popular hero. The statement that the scribes were 
planning his prosecution is significantly followed in 
Mark’s Gospel by a vivid picture of a scene on the lake 
front. Men and women from all over Palestine were 
there, from Sidon in the north to Idumea in the south, 
and from east of the Jordan. There was almost a panic. 
Demoniacs were shrieking; an excited crowd of men and 
women were pushing and fighting for @ chance to have 
their sick touch him, or to get near enough to see a heal- 
ing. Jesus was in danger of being thrown down and 


* TIT: 6-12. 


A LTHOUGH the purpose of the Galilean scribes to 


116 


VERDICT oF ScripEs AND ATTACK ON TRADITION 117 


trampled on. In self-defense he had a boat kept close to 
the shore so that he might wade out to it and escape: 
“He spoke to his disciples that a little boat should wait 
on him because of the crowd lest they should throng him.” 
The scene shows why he was so unwilling to have the 
- healing of disease become prominent. 

About this time Jesus did something which must have 
aroused intense suspicion among the scribes if they knew 
of it.2 Mark seems to imply a degree of secrecy in the 
procedure. Jesus sent personal invitations to a number 
of his followers, asking them to meet him at a designated 
place in the Galilean hill country: “He goeth up into the 
mountain and calleth to him whom he himself would.” 
Out of this number he selected twelve men. The Luke 
Gospel says that the night before he announced the names 
of those selected was spent in prayer.* He may have 
been deciding whether to take this step, or may have been 
going over the list of names, asking for guidance in choos- 
ing between those who seemed equally eligible. These 
twelve were to be with him more constantly than the main 
body of his disciples could be, were to be sent out to 
proclaim everywhere the nearness of the Coming King- 
dom, to describe the sort of righteousness that would be 
preparation for its Judgment Day and to expel demons. 
The number twelve would have seemed to the scribes a 
suspicious number. When the New Age should come it 
was expected by many, especially by those looking for “the 
Son of David,” that the old twelve tribe organization of 
the nation would be restored. The Matthew Gospel repre- 
sents Jesus to have said later to the twelve that each of 
them was to be in charge of a tribe in “the regeneration.” 4 

?Mk, III:13-19. 


*Lk. VI:12. 
“Mt. XTX :28, cf. Lk. XXIT;30, 


118 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


The scribes may have been led by this step to wonder 
whether Jesus’ popularity might be tempting him to 
have Messianic ambitions. Such action would not 
necessarily indicate this. Elijah or some other of the 
great prophets who were expected to return and pre- 
pare the nation for the New Age might have done 
this. 

The Galilean scribes, greatly disturbed by the unabating 
popularity of Jesus, and perhaps also by his selection of 
twelve men, sent to Jerusalem for re-enforcement from the 
great scribes of the city. These distinguished scribes 
tried to check the rising tide of Jesus’ popularity by pub- 
lishing an official verdict upon his career, which was 
calculated to make all men draw away from him in horror. 
The phenomenon they had to explain was, as they would 
have put it, that a notoriously irreligious man, deceiving 
the people by pretending to be a prophet of God, had 
unusual power to expel demons and cure the sick. Their 
explanation was that he got his power from Satan. Demons 
obeyed him because he was a superior devil.5 He was a 
high arch-devil commissioned by Satan to deceive the 
people and defeat God’s purpose to set up his Kingdom. 
The natural effect of such a verdict would be to make men, 
women and children avoid him. It would be unsafe for 
a man to stop on the edge of a crowd to which Jesus was 
talking because Jesus’ evil eye might rest upon him and 
bring a curse. 3 

To make matters still worse for Jesus just about this 
time his family appeared from Nazareth and, probably 
unconsciously, played into the hands of the Jerusalem 
scribes. The oldest Gospel brings out the fact that Jesus, 
just before the scribes came from Jerusalem with their 
verdict, had aroused unusual interest in his teaching. 


® Mk. III :22, 


VERDICT OF ScRIBES AND ATTACK ON TRADITION 119 


Crowds came to hear it with such interest that neither 
he nor they stopped to eat. The multitudes came together 
again “so that they could not so much as eat bread.” When 
the family in Nazareth heard of the intense abandon with 
which Jesus was giving himself to his teaching they 
reached the conclusion that he had lost his mental balance.® 
They were probably also disturbed by his unfortunate 
collisions with the scribes, for Jesus’ brother James. 
appears in early Christian history as a Christian of 
Pharisaic devotion to the law. They came down to Caper- 
naum probably intending to take Jesus back to Nazareth 
with the expectation that rest and seclusion would quiet 
his nerves. Perhaps also they feared that the ill will of 
the powerful scribes might bring danger to them as well 
as to Jesus. The Mark Gospel pictures their arrival at 
the house where Jesus was teaching and his resentment 
at their interference.” 

Jesus was deeply moved by the verdict of the Jerusalem 
scribes for he had really been tempted to make a tem- 
porary alliance with Satan in order to gain just such 
power as he was now able to exercise but had fought the 
temptation down.® He arranged a meeting with them 
in which he publicly discussed their verdict.® He said 
that their theory was absurd. It implied the existence of 
factions in Satan’s empire, one part trying to possess and 
destroy the bodies of men, the other trying to save them. 
It was like a kingdom divided into factions and therefore 
sure to fall, or like a family (his own family?) divided 
and sure to fall. An illustration of what actually had 
happened, he said, was the case of a person who enters a 


*Mk. IIT:20-21. 
Mk. IIT:31-35. 
*Mt. IV:7-10, see p. 78. 
°Mk. III:23-30, 


120 Tur Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


strong man’s castle, ties the strong man up, and then 
proceeds to do what he likes with the strong man’s belong- 
ings. He evidently meant that he had himself struggled 
with Satan, beaten and bound him and was now able to 
do what he liked with Satan’s subjects. He felt the 
triumphant consciousness of being empowered by God 
for leadership in that Kingdom which would banish Satan 
and all his subjects from the earth. Then he turned upon 
the dignified scholars with a terrible note of warning. 
As has been said before (p. 86), he reverenced pro- 
foundly the sacred power that was rising up within him, 
pouring out through him life, health and spiritual truth, 
at times urging him forward, at times holding him back— 
the Holy Spirit, the Spirit that would dominate the 
radiant life of the New Age. Anyone who now, in the 
very dawning of the Judgment Day, could face this high- 
est, holiest manifestation of the mercifully out-breaking 
heavens and see in it only a manifestation of hell was in 
danger of a fixed moral perversity that would stumble 
hopelessly on into the outer darkness. Such persons were 
in danger of an “eternal sin.” Verse 30 is the compiler’s 
comment: “because they said he hath an unclean spirit.” 
Perhaps the Jews of the compiler’s day were still saying 
this about Jesus. This passage may also express the 
opinion held by many Gentile Christians in Paul’s day, 
namely, that there was no hope for the Jewish nation. 
God had forever cast them off.!° 

Jesus’ answer to the verdict of the Jerusalem scribes 
seems to have satisfied the Galilean public, for his popu- 
larity continued without abatement. In the next chapters 
the evidences of this will be noted. The present discussion 
of his conflict with the Galilean scribes may be brought 
to a close by anticipating the final clash with them which 

” Of, Rom. XI:1, | 


Verpict or Scrines aNnp ATTracK on TrapITION 191 


led him to withdraw from Galilee. This clash was over 
the “tradition of the elders’ +? and must have seemed to 
the scribes most fundamental of all. The vigor of Jesus’ 
language in the controversy shows that his feeling had 
been intensified by their blasphemous attack on his Inner 
Spirit and by their determination to have him arrested. 
It is still the Jerusalem scribes that are re-enforcing the 
local Galilean Pharisees.12 They see or hear that some 
of Jesus’ disciples disregard the traditional explanation 
of the law by not carefully washing their hands before 
eating. From the standpoint of the scribes such washing 
was necessary because a person before coming to the table » 
might have touched some defiling object. Especially if he 
had recently been in the market he might have touched 
with his hands some person or thing connected with pagan 
worship. Since knives, forks and spoons were not in use 
and food was put into the mouth with the hands, any 
defilement would be communicated to the food and so pass 
into the system. What so passed into a man’s system was 
thought to affect his spirit. Therefore it was thought to 
be exceedingly important that, before handling food at 
table, the hands be washed in particular ways minutely 
specified. 

When the scribes called Jesus to account for tolerating 
the laxity of some of his disciples in this matter, he 
suddenly blazed out in. vehement attack on the whole 
system of “tradition” 1% in which the regulation regarding 
hand-washing was one item: “Isaiah gave a beautifully 
exact description of you hypocrites when he said, ‘this 
people honors me with their lips but their heart is far 
from me; it is in vain that they worship me while teaching ~ 


= Mk. VII:1-24. 
ks NV IT sh. 
*On “tradition” see p. 32. 


122 Tue Lire aNnpD TERAOHING OF JESUS 


as teachings (mere) commandments of men.’** You are 
abandoning the commandment of God and holding on to 
the tradition of men.” Jesus then proceeded to specify a 
particular instance of conflict between the law and the 
scribes’ traditional amplification of the law. It may have 
been a case that had come under his observation either 
recently or earlier in Nazareth. The law commanded that 
honor be shown to parents. The tradition said that a 
man might take a vow making all of his estate a gift to 
God (“Korban” is an Aramaic word meaning “gift’”’) so 
far as the support of his father was concerned, though not 
in fact parting with any of his property. After such a 
vow the tradition forbade his contributing anything to 
his father’s support even if he should repent his merciless 
vow. Jesus said that there were many similar cases of 
outrageous conflict between tradition and law. It is pos- 
sible to show from the Talmud that there were scribes 
who agreed with Jesus that no vow should interfere with 
the honor due to parents.’® It may still be true, however, 
that the scribes who came into collision with Jesus were 
of a different sort. 

After this indignant outbreak against the scribes Jesus 
proceeded to do a daring thing. He called the crowds 
about him and made a public attack on the traditional 
teaching regarding food laws. He said that no foods 
entering the stomach could defile the spirit. It was not 
food going in through the mouth into the stomach that 
produced moral defilement, but evil words coming out 
through the mouth from a foul heart! This was a sweep- 

“The quotation from Isaiah is from the Greek translation of the 
Old Testament. The Hebrew contains a less appropriate thought. 
It may be that the strong feeling of the church against the syna- 
gogue in the Gospel maker’s time has somewhat shaped the details 


of this discussion. 
* Montefiore, Synoptic Gospels, pp. 164-5. 


Verpict oF Scrises AND ATTACK ON TRADITION 123 


ing utterance apparently annulling not only the tradition 
but the dietary law itself. Just how much Jesus meant 
by it was not clear to the early Christians. As we have 
seen (p. 14) the Matthew Gospel says that he was talking 
only about the scribal tradition regarding hand washing, 
while Mark’s Gospel says that he here abrogated the 
Levitical food law itself.*® 

In any case, this sharp clash between Jesus and the 
Galilean Pharisees re-enforced by great scholars from 
Jerusalem terminated Jesus’ work in Galilee, at least for 
the time being. He made a long journey into the country 
north of Galilee, the regions of Tyre and Sidon, and tried 
to find obscure lodgings where his presence would not 
be noticed.” 

The fundamental difference between Jesus and the 
scribes, as revealed in all these incidents, was in their 
idea of God and what he wanted of men. Jesus brought 
into the situation a fresh and profound experience with 
God. He knew himself to be a son of God living in 
conscious fellowship with God; he knew himself to be “The 
Son of God, the Beloved” charged with the responsibility 
of leadership in the Kingdom of God, though what form 
this leadership would assume he may have learned only as 
time went on. In his new experience with God he found 
God not to be selfishly reserving to himself the glad 
experience of forgiving sin. It was not true, as the scribes 
asserted, that God only could forgive sins. Jesus found 
God thrusting him out to forgive sins with the expectation 
that all men could be trained to feel God in them forgiving 
the sins of penitent men. God was not holding himself 
aloof from bad men, as the scribes supposed. Jesus found 
God pushing him out into friendly social relations with 


*Mt. XV:20, Mk. VIT:19. 
"Mk. VII:24. 


194. Tue Lire anp TRACHING OF JESUS 


publicans and sinners. God took no delight in the gloomy 
fastings that the scribes were urging upon the home life 
of working men and women and their children in the com- 
munity. He found the life of God welling up within him 
and overflowing in wholesome gladness at every turn. He 
found that God was not wanting his Sabbath to be kept 
with painful abstinence from a multitude of activities. 
God was pushing him out to go everywhere doing good on 
the Sabbath, doing whatever he could to meet the needs 
of men in the larger leisure from regular work to be 
enjoyed on the Sabbath. God did not go about the family 
table making a close inspection of hands to see whether 
there was evidence that some ungodly fellow being had 
been touched! He listened rather to the table talk to see 
whether it came from hearts that were true and friendly 
or mean and spiteful. In a word, God was a Heavenly 
Father in the midst of human children, not a mere law- 
giver, bookkeeper and detective. 

In connection with all these points this question con- 
stantly arises: Why did the scribes not see that Jesus’ 
idea of God and true religion was better than their own? 
The sad story of our own prejudices gives a partial answer. 
We are all slow to modify hereditary religious ideas which 
often have the associations of childhood knit up with 
them, especially when we have maintained them at con- 
siderable cost in the face of opposition. Doubtless many 
scribes did recognize the superiority of Jesus’ views and 
quietly dropped out of the ranks of active antagonists. 
Regarding the residuum, who constituted the powerful 
“machine” element, Jesus finally uttered a searching 
criticism. He said that they were wedded to the views of 
which they were everywhere recognized as the distin- 
guished champions, because such recognition brought them 
a large measure of social prestige. It brought them defer- 


Verpict or ScriBEs AND ATTACK ON TRADI:iON 125 


ential greetings in the market places, the most honorable 
seats in the synagogues and at dinner parties.1® They 
probably retorted that Jesus advocated his “loose views” 
because of the popularity he gained by doing so! Jesus 
was finally tested at this point, and stood the test. 

* Mk. XII:38-39. 


CHAPTER XIII 


FOUR WONDERFUL WORKS: THE POWER 
OF FAITH 


URING all the period of Jesus’ conflict with the 
1B: Pharisees, described in the last two chapters, his 
popularity in Galilee had been increasing. Mark’s 

Gospel records a group of four “mighty works,” ? all 
occurring within twenty-four hours, that illustrate Jesus’ 
power and that partly account for his great reputation 
among the people. At the later time, when the Gospels 
were forming and Jesus’ Messiahship was a recognized 
fact, these four mighty works naturally seemed to be in- 
cidents in the triumphal progress of the Son of God as 
he passed in fulness of power through the dark earth- 
realm of Satan. He stood up in a boat on the Sea of 
Galilee in the midst of a storm and subdued the fierce 
storm-spirit by a word of rebuke; as soon as he came to 
Jand he sent a legion of demons out of a demoniac into 
a herd of swine that straightway fled from his presence 
into the sea; the next day when he came back to the other 
side of the sea a desperate woman in the crowded street 
was cured by simply touching the fringe of his garment; 
a few moments later he stood by the bedside of a dead 
child and overcame death itself. All of these phenomena, 
the destructive storm, the fierce horde of demons, the deso- 
lating sickness, death itself, belonged, according to popu- 


*Mk. IV:35-V:43. 
126 


Tue Power or Fairu 127 


lar thought, in Satan’s dark realm which the Son of God 
had come to overthrow by bringing in the Reign of God. 
These wonderful deeds did not, however, at the time of 
their occurrence convince the people that Jesus was the 
Messiah. He seemed to them to be only a great prophet 
of God. If we are to get at their real meaning in terms 
of our own thought world it is necessary to inquire what 
actually happened in each case and what the religious 
experience of Jesus was in each. 

The experience in the storm occurred in the late after- 
noon of a day when Jesus, sitting in a boat a few rods 
out from the shore, had been talking to great crowds on 
the lake front. He evidently found himself tired out and 
asked the few disciples, who were with. him in the boat, 
to go directly across to the other side of the lake for a 
night’s rest away from the crowds. A flotilla of other 
little fishing boats full of people listening to his teaching 
had gathered around his boat. Some of these boats per- 
haps also started across the lake. Jesus immediately 
stretched himself out on a seat in the stern of the boat, 
with his head on a cushion or wooden head rest, and at 
once fell into a sound sleep. When they were well out 
in the lake (some five or six miles across at this point) 
one of the fierce storms, frequent then as now, suddenly 
came down upon them. The day had been hot and the 
heated air over the surface of the lake low down among 
the hills, rising rapidly, let in tremendous currents of 
colder air coming down the valleys from the northern 
mountains. The boat soon began to fill with water, but 
neither the wetness of his clothes, the motion of the boat, 
the roaring of the wind, nor the shouting of the men dis- 
turbed Jesus’ sound sleep. The disciples roused him 
and said with some impatience according to Mark: 
“Teacher, does it make no difference to you that we are 


128 Tur Lirr anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


being lost?” (Mt., “Lord save us, we are being lost!” 
Lk., “Master, Master, we are being lost!) As soon as 
he was thoroughly awake, ‘he rebuked the wind and said 
to the sea, ‘Silence; be still!’”’ The wind died away and 
there was a complete calm. What Jesus then said to his 
disciples shows that the uppermost thought in his mind 
was “faith.” ‘Why are you so frightened,” he said, ‘“‘have 
you no faith yet?” What did he mean by ‘faith’? In 
general “faith in God,” as Jesus used the expression, is 
the reaching out of the soul to work with the unseen energy 
of God in good will and at any cost for the common 
good. To have faith in a man is to have such confidence 
in his ability and character, either present or potential, 
as leads one to wish to work with him for the common 
good. In this experience on the lake Jesus had conscious- 
ness of being chosen by God to introduce the New Age 
for man. In faith he had given himself to God to do this 
great work at any cost. Such faith enabled him to sleep 
soundly through all the uproar of the storm. God, the 
Heavenly Father, whose living will had risen high and 
powerful in his soul, would not let anything happen that 
would defeat the great purpose. Jesus felt that his dis- 
ciples ought by this time to be sharing his own faith 
in God, and in himself as the one who was leading the 
way into the New Age. Very possibly he had been talk- 
ing with unusual force to the crowds that afternoon about 
having faith in the Heavenly Father. The disciples 
seemed not to get his point. They said to each other, 
“Who then is this that even the wind and the sea obey 
him?” This remark does not indicate complete ignorance 
of Jesus’ mission as the great prophet who leads the way 
into the New Age, but it does show them to have had 
no idea that such a prophet would have power over storms. 
It probably also shows that they did not yet see in him, 


Tue Power or Faritru 129 


as they did later, one who was more than.a great prophet- 
leader. 

We naturally ask, What actually happened in the boat 
on the lake? What connection was there between the per- 
sonality of Jesus and the sudden change in the weather ? 
It is often said that. there was none, that Jesus’ quieting 
faith in God was the impressive fact, that the storm 
happened to die away just when it did, and that what 
goes beyond this in the narrative as it stands was the 
sincere interpretation of the incident made by the early 
Christians, who thought they knew how the Messiah must 
have acted under such circumstances. If we follow the 
hints given by Jesus regarding his experience in the heal- 
ing of disease (p. 85), we should naturally say that Jesus 
prayed to God in the storm and received instant assurance 
of safety. Whatever he really said was an expression of 
this assurance. But could the will of God affect the 
weather? We are learning that the “forces of nature,” 
by virtue of their reliable habits of action, their “fixed 
laws,” are extremely susceptible to the manipulation of 
Peconal human wills, acting always, to be sure, through 
apparatus, but often a diminishing amount of apparatus. 
Such manipulation of them has produced much that is _ 
most wonderful in our modern civilization. This field 
has been given over to man for his conquest... He would 
not wish for any intervention by God that would take 
away from him the joy of independent achievement. At 
the same time it is not inconceivable that the mysterious 
will of God should under certain circumstances co-ordinate 
some of these forces in posponse to prayer. ‘The line be- 
tween “spiritual” and “physical” energy does not seem 
so clear as it once did. 

When Jesus’ boat came to the eastern shore after the 
storm it was evening. At some distance from the lake 


130 THe Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


V:6), a demoniac stood in the door of one of the burial 
chambers, cut out in the rocky hillside, and watched the 
boat draw near the shore. His family had kept him at 
home in the city as long as possible, but the violence of 
his terrible frenzy was such that no chains or fetters could 
hold him and they had to let him run wild. The devils 
had so utterly befouled him that he lived permanently in 
the defilement of a tomb chamber, always a favorite resort 
for demons. He was in the habit of ranging up and down 
the hillsides, yelling and attacking man and beast. His 
dirty naked body was covered with scars where he had 
gashed it with stones. His unusual strength and fierce- 
ness had made people say that a crowd of devils had en- 
tered his body. He considered the name of the pack to 
be “Legion.” When he saw that the group of men had 
landed he rushed down the hillside to attack them, but 
as soon as he came into the presence of Jesus he salaamed 
before him. Jesus, as usual, ordered the evil spirit to 
come out of him. The excited demon, calling Jesus by 
his title, “Son of God Most High,” shouted out a protest 
against being sent to torment before the Judgment Day. 

The psychological explanation of the behavior of 
demoniacs in the presence of Jesus has been discussed 
(p. 87). If any importance is to be attached to a possible 
telepathic connection, mentioned in that discussion, be- 
tween the mind of Jesus and the disordered mind of a 
demoniac, there would be particular significance in the 
fact that Jesus came to this interview just after his ex- 
perience in the storm in which the sense of God’s presence 
had been particularly strong in him. This man’s case 
differed from those previously discussed in the fact that 
he was not living in a place where Jesus’ reputation as 
an exorcist and his preaching about the Judgment Day 
were being talked about on every side. It is, of course, 


Tue Power or Farru 131 


not impossible that those who used this story in the early 
preaching of the pre-Gospel period put into this narrative 
what they knew to have been the usual conversation be- 
tween Jesus and the demoniacs. But it may be that this 
man, in the earlier stages of his disease, when he was 
still with his family, had heard much about Jesus or even 
seen him. Jesus was famous in the region east of the 
Jordan ? and may have occasionally visited it. We know 
that he did visit it later? Jesus asked the demon what 
his name was. It is often said that he asked the man 
to tell him his name, with the purpose of bringing the 
man back to normal consciousness. This probably reads 
into the story too much of the modern psychological view- 
point. The story comes to us in popular folk lore form, 
and from this standpoint it would be natural to think 
that Jesus’ power compelled the demon to reveal his name 
and so to put himself under the control of the one who had 
discovered it. The man, speaking for the terrified demons 
within him, revealed the secret: “Legion is my name.” 
The man knew how his “Legion” dreaded a return to a 
bodiless state in which they would have no instrument 
through which to gratify their fierce lust to destroy. He 
saw a large drove of hogs near by, which he had perhaps 
often stampeded. He knew that the drove of devils would 
be glad to get into them and work destruction there. He 
begged that they might do so and, when permission was 
given, perhaps started toward the drove with the imagined 
rush of the demons in that direction. The frightened 
animals, stampeded by him more than once before, rushed 
down the hillside and were piled upon the shore and in 
the water dead. 

The disciples doubtless washed the man’s wounds, pro- 


* Mk. IIT:8. 
*Mk. VII:31. 


132 Tur Lire anp TEraoninea or JEsuUsS 


vided him with clothing and rejoiced with him over the 
great deliverance that Jesus had wrought for him. He 
was much interested in the account given him during the 
evening of what Jesus and his disciples were preaching 
and doing on the Galilean side of the lake. He had every 
reason to believe that the Kingdom of God was near! In 
the morning, after a night of natural sleep, when Jesus 
started back he begged to be taken on as a member of 
the company. Jesus, however, insisted on his going back 
to his family to tell them what God had done for him. 
As we have seen, Jesus sometimes tried to avoid or to 
conceal the cure of disease, but he is never represented to 
have felt this desire in the case of the expulsion of demons. 
The man went all through the Ten City District, telling 
what had happened to him and probably saying much 
about the nearness of the Kingdom of God which had so 
frightened his Legion. 

The swineherds had at once reported the occurrence 
in the city and the next morning great crowds came out 
to the place. They saw the wild man sane, clothed, sitting 
quietly listening to Jesus’ daily teaching. They also saw 
the dead hogs and felt that the man’s restoration to the 
community had been accomplished at too great a cost. 
They urged Jesus to leave the country at once! 

In the early forenoon Jesus returned to the western 
shore and found a large crowd gathered on the Jake front 
waiting for him. The whole community was excited over 
the great trouble that had come to the home of a leading 
citizen, one of the synagogue rulers. His twelve year old 
daughter (Lk., his only daughter) was lying at the point 
of death and he was himself in the midst of the crowd 
nervously watching the approaching boat. As soon as 
Jesus landed the synagogue ruler, not content with the 
ordinary salaam, fell on the ground at his feet and begged 


Tur Powers or Farru 133 


him most urgently to hurry home with him and save his 
little daughter’s life by his healing hand. The syna- 
gogue rulers in Capernaum presumably sympathized with 
the scribes, who had before this determined to prosecute 
Jesus in the courts and who had probably urged upon all 
synagogue rulers his exclusion from the synagogue plat- 
form. This ruler’s action, therefore, was in defiance of 
his class. He had not accepted the theory that Jesus was 
in league with Satan, and his desperate desire to save his 
little daughter was enough to make him go against his 
colleagues. Jesus at once started with him for the house. 
_ The whole crowd closed in about them and went along 
full of sympathy for the anxious father. As they were 
hurrying along Jesus suddenly stopped, turned around 
and said, ‘Who touched my clothes?” No one spoke 
and the disciples called his attention to the fact that 
many people were jostling against him. He kept peering 
about through the crowd until a trembling woman, fright- 
ened at the liberty she had taken, stepped out, dropped 
on her knees before him and told her sad story. She had 
for a long time been afflicted with continual menstrual 
hemorrhage, which made her ceremonially defiling to 
everyone who touched her.* She was a desperate, lonely 
woman. Her disease had doubtless caused her husband 
to divorce her, if she was a married woman, and it had 
made her presence in the general social life of the com- 
munity an impossibility. She had contaminated those who 
had touched her in this crowd and some shrank back as 
they heard her confession. In her desperation. she had 
spent everything she had on physicians, who had pre- 
scribed painful remedies, but had not helped her, and 
she was now 1n the worst stage of the disease. She had 


not dared to bring her case openly to Jesus, but she had 
‘Lev, XV:19-30, 


134. Tuer Lire AND TEACHING OF JESUS 


felt sure that she would be cured if she could simply come 
near him and, without anyone knowing it, touch his gar- 
ment, especially the tassel on his cloak (Mt., Lk.) that 
showed him to be a man who loved God’s law. Perhaps 
too she thought that simply touching his clothing would 
not contaminate his person. So she had been on the lake 
front watching for his return and with suppressed eager- 
ness had edged her way through the crowd until she got 
her chance. Instantly she had felt the consciousness of 
health. Jesus, too, according to the explanation of the 
Gospel writer (Lk., his own explanation) had a sen- 
sation which presumably was usual when he healed. He 
had felt “power go out from him.” Jesus after hearing 
her story minimized his part in the cure. “It was your 
faith that cured you,” he said, “go in peace and be a 
healthy woman from now on.” Such cures are not un- 
known in modern therapeutics and might be psychologi- 
cally explained by the word “faith,” though not necessarily 
in the sense in which Jesus used the word. The faith of 
those who came to him was more than mere expectation 
of being cured. Jesus was recognized by them as a 
prophet of the New Age. They expected to be cured as 
a part of, or in preparation for, the healthy life of the 
New Age. Faith meant, therefore, setting their faces, 
more or less consciously, toward the life of God’s New 
Age and its righteousness as the prophet was constantly 
describing it. Jesus, too, was so charged with the life of 
God that great tides of healthful psychic influence prob- 
ably flowed out from his person to those who were in ex- 
pectant spiritual touch with him. The Spirit of God was 
at this time kindling all his being in anticipation of what 
would soon be done for the little girl at the point of 
death. In these moments as he hastened along the street 
in prayerful spiritual communion with the Heavenly 


Tur Power or Faitru 135 


Father, this woman’s timid hand of confident faith was 
laid upon him. 

This delay must have been almost intolerable to the 
synagogue ruler, who felt that every minute was pre- 
cious. When he saw his servants pushing in through the 
crowd he knew that his worst fears were realized. They 
said, “It is of no use to trouble the Teacher; she is dead.” 
But Jesus was not disturbed. He urged the ruler to 
maintain the same state of mind that he had just seen 
cure the woman, ‘Do not be afraid,” he said, “only keep 
on having faith.” If we follow Jesus’ hint as to his pro- 
cedure in curing disease (p. 85) we should infer that he 
had held this little girl up in a flash of prayer before 
God the moment he heard of her and had received instant 
assurance that she would live. In a few moments they 
reached the house. The mourners, for some hours in 
waiting to be ready the moment they were needed, had 
already begun the death wail. The house was full of 
confusion.° Jesus insisted that the crowd should remain 
in the street. He left his own disciples, except three 
who went in with him, to keep the crowd back. He told 
the mourners to keep quiet; the little girl was not yet 
dead, but only sleeping. This seemed to them a reflection 
on their professional skill and they scoffed at him. He 
insisted that they should all leave and then the six of them, 
father, mother, himself and his three disciples, went into 
the sick room together. Jesus very simply took the child’s 
hand, and said in her Aramaic vernacular, “Get up, little 
girl.” She instantly got up and began to walk about 

*Matthew mentions flute players. Perhaps the piercing notes of 
the flute were not heard at funerals among the Gentile circles for 
which the Mark and Luke Gospels were prepared. According to the 
Talmud, even the poorest Israelite should have two flute players 


and one wailing woman at his wife’s death. A synagogue president 
in the case of an only daughter would probably have more. 


136 Tur Lirz anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


the room. ‘Those who were with Jesus were astonished, 
but he minimized the occurrence. He told them to get 
her something to eat and with great emphasis warned 
them never to mention the matter. He knew that the 
report of what had happened might easily produce a state 
of mind among the people very unfavorable to the con- 
sideration of the moral responsibilities he was pressing 
upon them. 

One other case of this kind is found in another of the 
first three Gospels,® but no ‘etails of the death are given. 
Jesus is reported to have stopped a funeral procession in 
which a widow’s only son was being carried out of the 
city for burial. Jesus laid his hand on the open coffin 
and told the young man to get up. He at once sat up and 
began to speak to those about him. Jesus “gave him to 
his mother.” How long he had been dead the narrative 
does not state. Perhaps it had been only a very short 
time. In the east burial follows death by only a few 
hours, Lieutenant Conder saw a boy killed by falling 
from a tree and buried within fifteen minutes.” Calling 
the spirit back into the body probably did not seem as 
wonderful to the Jewish mind as to us. According to 
the Talmud the spirit stayed about the body for three 
days after death, presumably hoping for a chance to get 
back.® | 

From the modern medical standpoint natural death is 
a process and not an instantaneous occurrence. Some- 
times the process is thought not to have ended and resus- 
citative measures to be efficacious some hours after death 

*Lk. VII:11-17. ; 

*Conder, Tent Work in Palestine, p. 326. 

*The case of Lazarus in the Fourth Gospel was thought to be 


hopeless because he had been dead four days. His sister supposed 


that decomposition would have begun but the narrative does not 
btate that this was the case, 


Tue Power oF Farru 137 


would have once seemed complete. The same power over 
susceptible minds that was used by Jesus in curing dis- 
ease, might, it would seem, have been available to arrest 
the process of death and to keep the mind in connection 
with the body. In his experience the outstanding feature in 
such cases was faith, his own faith, and the faith of others 
immediately concerned. Here again faith involved the 
_ keen consciousness of the energy of the living God close 
at hand and the reaching out of the soul to work with 
it in good will and in great hope. The mind of the little 
girl had presumably been in sympathy with her father’s 
purpose. She knew that he had gone out to bring the 
prophet of the New Age. She was expectant in her last 
conscious moments and susceptible to his influence, and 
she believed in the God of her father. 


CHAPTER XIV 


EXTENSION OF THE MOVEMENT IN GALILEE 
THROUGH TRAINED ASSISTANTS 


with trained assistants. In the oldest Gospel the 
account of his sending these men out is preceded by a 
paragraph describing the very disagreeable treatment re- 
ceived by him and his assistants in his home town.? Jesus 
is répresented to have been much surprised by it: “he 
marvelled because of their unbelief.’”’ Perhaps what he 
discovered here led him to suspect that, in spite of his 
very great general popularity, there was among the peo- 
ple an element of opposition, an element that had been 
influenced by the hostile attitude of the scribes and per- 
haps by the leaders of the revolutionary party of Judas 
and Saddouk (p. 35), though not openly active against 
him. He knew well enough that there would be opposi- 
tion in Jerusalem and Judea but he might have hoped 
to get thorough possession of Galilee. This discovery 
of hostile sentiment in Nazareth may have led him at 
once to intensify his effort by sending out his assistants, 
although of course the mere juxtaposition of the two para- 
graphs in Mark is no proof of this. 
Jesus came back to his home town a famous teacher, 
bringing with him a company of admiring “disciples,” 
who were probably anticipating an enthusiastic welcome 


2Mk, VI:1-6, 7-13. 


J ESUS, as soon as possible, shared his work in Galilee. 


138 


TRAINED ASSISTANTS 139 


for their Rabbi. He came back to the old home, the old 
shop, the old synagogue and school of his boyhood, back 
to the people for whom he had worked, to his mother, 
brothers and sisters, brothers-in-law, nephews and nieces. 
Everywhere he was coldly received. His brothers-in-law 
and sisters-in-law seemed supercilious; the children per- 
haps felt about their uncle as they found their parents 
feeling (p. 56). In his own language, he found himself 
a “prophet without honor,” not only “in his own country” 
but even “among his own kin and in his own family.” 
We have already seen that his family were out of sym- 
pathy with him. They had appeared at a most awkward 
moment in his public work, possessed of the idea that he 
had lost his mental balance and needed to be kept in 
seclusion at home until he should recover it.” They were 
probably still unhappy over the dignified repulse they 
had received then. 

On the Sabbath, when Jesus spoke in the old synagogue, 
the audience was impressed by the tone of authority that 
characterized all his teaching,? but found it offensive. 
Why should one who had made their furniture and farm 
tools talk to them in this way! His family connec- 
tions were no better than theirs! Very likely the 
great scholars were right in attributing his unusual power 
over demons to an alliance with Satan. His own family 
suspected his sanity. He always had been queer. It 
certainly had a bad look! “What is this wisdom that is 
given unto this man, and what mean such mighty works 
wrought by his hands? Is not this the carpenter, the son 
of Mary, and brother of James and Judas and Joses and 
Simon? And are not his sisters here with us? And they 
were offended in him.” In support of their theory it 


7Mk. IIT:20-21, 31-35, cf. Jn. VII:5. 
ewok. 1:27. 


140 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


turned out that “he could do there no mighty work.” He 
was able simply to lay his hands upon a few sick folk 
among the old neighbors and heal them. The Nazareth 
people had found him out! They knew him better than 
the crowds that he had deluded! 

The visit probably included at least two Sabbaths, on 
both of which he spoke in the synagogue. If so there would 
be place here for the account of a Nazareth visit found in 
Luke’s Gospel with its characteristic emphasis on Jesus’ 
graciousness of speech and winsome power over an audi- 
ence.* According to this account Jesus began his address 
in the synagogue by reading from the Isaiah roll ® a para- 
graph which he either selected himself or which was a 
part of the assigned scripture reading for the day: “The 
Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he anointed me 
to preach good tidings to the poor: He hath sent me to 
proclaim release to the captives, and recovering of sight 
to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to 
proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk., IV: 18-_ 
19). 

Luke placed this great proclamation at the beginning 
of his account of Jesus’ public career, although he recog- 
nized that it had been preceded by work in Capernaum,® 
because it seemed to him a beautiful description of the 
whole career of Jesus. It was not intended by Jesus to 
be an announcement of his Messiahship for he concealed 
his Messianic consciousness after it had fully developed,’ 
and the audience on this occasion did not regard it as 
such. 

Luke knew that it must have been true that “they all 


*Lk. IV:16-30. 
5TIs. LXI:1-2. 
*Lk. IV :23. 
TLk. IX:20-21. 


TRAINED ASSISTANTS : 141 


bare him witness and wondered at the words of grace 
which proceeded out of his mouth.” Certainly the few 
humble sick folk on whom he laid his healing hands would 
have carried away this impression, and Luke may have 
met some of them in searching through Galilee for Gospel 
material. But Luke also brings out the rougher side of 
the experience. Perhaps it was on the second Sabbath 
that Jesus explained, in what seemed to be an offensively 
unpatriotic way, his inability to do in Nazareth any such 
“mighty works” as had been done in Capernaum. It was 
a way that was particularly pleasing to the catholic spirit 
of Luke and his Gentile readers. Jesus said that God 
had often been more ready to do wonderful things for 
foreigners than for his own people! The extreme anger of 
the audience at this statement, which almost led to lynch- 
ing him, is intelligible only in case there was more in- 
volved in the situation than appears on the surface.? This 
unpatriotic readiness to think well of foreigners was the 
same spirit that Jesus had shown when he used to refuse 
to go with other young Nazareth men to attend the patri- 
otic meetings of the Judas and Saddouk party in their 
revolutionary agitation against Rome and that had led him 
to go south to John the Baptist instead of allying himself 
with the northern revolutionists (p. 61). The same force 
of character and uncompromising loyalty .to conviction 
on the part of Jesus that made for him such bitter enemies 
during his public life, had probably at an earlier time 
made enemies in Nazareth. The hot anger of the audi- 
ence now afforded an opportunity to pay off old scores 
and gratify old prejudices. After the service some of 


*Luke very probably saw in this incident a forecast of the way 
in which the Jews would later regard the evangelization of the 
Gentiles, but it is very improbable that either he or his source 
created the narrative to show this. 


142 Tue Lirr anp TErACHING OF JESUS 


these fiery patriots hustled Jesus down the street and were 
on the point of pitching him over a cliff outside the town, 
but did not do so. Luke’s graceful style obscures the real 
ugliness of the action he describes: “He said unto them, 
Doubtless ye will say unto me this parable, Physician 
heal thyself; whatsoever we have heard done at Caper- 
naum do also here in thine own country. And he said, 
Verily I say unto you no prophet is acceptable in his own 
country. But of a truth I say unto you, There were 
many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the 
heaven was shut up three years and six months, when 
there came a great famine over all the land; and unto 
none of them was Elijah sent but only to Zarephath in 
the land of Sidon, unto a woman that was a widow. And 
there were many lepers in Israel in the time of Elisha 
the prophet and none of them was cleansed, but only 
Naaman the Syrian. And they were all filled with wrath 
in the synagogue as they heard these things; and they 
rose up and cast him forth out of the city, and led him 
unto the brow of the hill whereon their city was 
built, that they might throw him down headlong. But 
he passing through the midst of them went his 
way.” 

After this experience in Nazareth Jesus pushed his 
Galilean propaganda with great energy. He used for this 
purpose the twelve men whom he had appointed at the 
semi-private meeting in the hill country about Caper- 
naum. ‘The list of their names appears in all three of 
the Synoptic Gospels (also in Acts) and in no two are 
the lists exactly alike.® This may indicate that there — 
was some doubt later regarding the exact personnel of — 
the group. There were apparently some who were so 
closely associated with the Twelve as to be easily con- | 

*Mk. III:16-19, Mt. X:2-4, Lk. VI:14-16, Acts 1:13-14. 


TRAINED ASSISTANTS 143 


fused with them. Two such were considered eligible for 
the vacancy occasioned by the treachery of Judas.?° 
These men had been selected because of their fitness 
for such work as Jesus is now about to send them out to do 
and also perhaps because of such administrative gifts as 
would fit them for the tribal headships that Jesus is re- 
ported to have planned for them.’? It was necessary that 
they should be men susceptible to new ideas and capable 
of catching Jesus’ disposition, not men of extreme 
Pharisaic conservatism; men of sufficient force to stand 
their ground against adverse criticism; men able te com- 
municate ideas and conduct a platform or conversational. - 
propaganda. The four fish dealers and the publican Mat- 
thew (Levi?), whom Jesus had earlier called to disciple- 
ship, were among the Twelve, also a man named Simon 
called “the Cananean” (‘‘fiery” or “zealous”) by Mark, 
“the Zealot” by Luke, ordinarily considered to be a mem- 
ber of the Judas-Saddouk revolutionary party.** Two 
of them, Philip and Andrew, had Greek names, which 
indicates that their parents were not fanatically anti- 
foreign in their sympathies. James and John, the sons 
of the fishpacker Zebedee, were called ‘“Boanerges,”’ 
which Mark understands to mean “Sons of Thunder.” 
The title, so understood, suggests that they were rough, 
thundering men, ready to break out into fearless action 
that might lead to martyrdom, or ready to call down God’s 
thunderous rebuke on the enemies of their Lord, as they 
are elsewhere said to have done.1® Peter’s name always 
heads the list and the name of Judas Iscariot comes last. 
What Iscariot means is uncertain, possibly ‘‘man from 


* Acts 1:21-23. : 
41 Mt. XIX :28. 
_ ™For the view that the title perhaps describes simply his personal 


zeal see Jackson and Lake, Beginnings of Christianity, vol. 1, p. 425. 
* Lk. IX:51-55. 


144 Tur Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


Kerioth.” There was a place of this name in Judea and 
another in Moab,?* and if either of these was his home 
town he was not a Galilean like the rest. He must have 
been a man who seemed to Jesus to possess great ability 
but as time went on he did not develop the requisite 
character. 

These men were sent out to do what they had seen 
Jesus do. They preached the nearness of the Kingdom 
and repeated, as well as they could, what they had so 
often heard Jesus say about the way to live in order to 
be ready for its coming.4® They tried, no doubt with 
considerable success, to exorcise demons, using a formula 
which had in it the name of Jesus.4® The fame of Jesus, 
the mighty prophet of God, the herald of the Judgment 
Day, made his name terrifying to all demoniacs and gave 
it therapeutic power. They rubbed oil on the bodies of 
the sick, perhaps also using the name of Jesus, and effected 
many cures. There was no occasion to speak of Jesus as 
_the Messiah even if they at this time had thought of him 
as such. 

Jesus sent them out in pairs because the word of two 
witnesses testifying to the nearness of the Judgment Day 
would be more effective than the unsupported testimony 
of one. In Jewish courts the importance of having more 
than one witness was recognized.’7 Moreover two men 
would quicken each other’s wits and support each other 
in the difficult situations which the presence of hostile 
scribes in many communities would surely produce. They 
would have to meet the Beelzeboul theory (p. 118). Scribes 
who had not hesitated to accuse Jesus of being Satan’s 


4% Josh. XV:25, Jer. XLVIII:24. 
* Mk. VI:7-13. 

* Of. Mk. IX:39. 

Of. 11 Cor. XTII:1. 


—_ 


eA ser ace Dy 


TRAINED ASSISTANTS 145 


ally would bring the same charge against Jesus’ mes- 
sengers: “If they have called the master of the house 
Beelzeboul, how much more them of his household.” Some 
of them, going back to their home towns, would find mem- 
bers of their own families turned against them as had 
been the experience of Jesus in Nazareth. “I came to 
set a man at variance against his father,” “a man’s foes 
shall be they of his own household,” Jesus is reported in 
Q to have said at this time.?® 

Emphasis is laid on the meager equipment that was to 
characterize their campaign. They were to take no money, 
not even small change in the girdle, no bread, no traveling 
bag, only one shirt (“‘chiton”), light sandals. Prophets 
often symbolized their message by some dramatic peculi- 
arity of dress or manner. This meager equipment was 
a dramatic portrayal of haste and of the urgent need of 
instant action. The Judgment Day and the Kingdom 
of God were near! It was as if a man, bare headed, in 
his shirt sleeves, and with slippers on his feet, should 
be seen galloping by on horseback. Everyone who sees 
him knows that he bears some urgent message or has 
some serious business on hand. When these men met 
anyone on the way they were to hurry on without stopping 
for the leisurely greetings characteristic of oriental cour- 
tesy. When they reached a village they were to seek out 
the family most likely to be in sympathy with them— 
Jesus had many friends all over Galilee—take lodgings 
there and spend no time in ordinary social intercourse. 
They probably tried to get the privilege of speaking in 
the synagogues on the Sabbath and on other days talked 
with groups in the market places, just as Jesus was always 
doing. If they found a community set against them as 
Nazareth had been, they were to waste no time on it, but 

* Mt. X:25, 35-36, Lk. XII:51-53. 


146 Tue Lirz anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


were to leave it with dramatic oriental gestures proclaim- 
ing its doom in the Coming Judgment, and hurry on to 
the next village. 

Any description of apostolic evangelizing would ne 
ally more or less reflect customs prevalent among evangel- 
izers at the time when Gospel material was being gathered. 
Miscellaneous oral tradition, current in the many com- 
munities visited by apostles, would have been particularly 
active at this point, and influential in developing habits 
of evangelization. ‘There is very little if anything in 
Mark’s Gospel that does not seem thoroughly suitable to 
the original situation. The other two Gospels, especially 
Matthew (X: 16-42), include matter, in this connection, 
that evidently suits a later period, when Christian wit- 
nesses were being arrested, tried in the local sanhedrins, 
beaten in the synagogues as criminals; when members of 
a family were lodging information with persecuting au- 
thorities against their nearest relatives; when Christians 
were being brought before procurators and kings in the 
eyes of foreign nations. All the confident, comforting, en- 
couraging words of Jesus that could be gathered from 
miscellaneous collections of his teachings were massed at 
this point and so shaped as to make them useful in the 
time of need greater than could have been experienced 
in these few weeks when the Twelve were traveling about 
by twos in Galilee.4® One such utterance in particular 
will come up for consideration later (p. 250): “Ye shall 
not have gone through the cities of Israel until the Son 
of Man be come.” 

” This does not necessarily imply a very late date for Q. Accord- 
ing to the Acts Jews in Palestine and in the dispersion were very 
early eager to bring Christians before Roman authorities. Accord- 
ing to Tacitus Christians were already very unpopular in Rome 


before the great fire in 64 and this fact would have increased their 
natural unpopularity in the provinces. 


TRAINED ASSISTANTS 147 


Luke’s Gospel adds an account of a later sending out of 
seventy, two by two, whose equipment and conduct were 
to be like those prescribed by Jesus for the Twelve.”° 
While they were out on their preaching venture, Jesus 
is reported to have had a profound spiritual experience. 
As he in imagination followed these thirty-five pairs of 
venturesome men, saw them exorcising demons, curing the 
sick and telling their marketplace audiences how to pre- 
pare for the breaking in of the New Age, he had a vision 
of the utter overthrow of Satan’s empire. He saw Satan 
fall from the heavens with all the swiftness of a lightning 
flash. Jesus felt that the power of God would work in 
these messengers, and others like them, for the utter over- 
throw of evil in the world. All the right minded in 
Israel ought to pray God to send out more such into his 
ripe harvest field. It filled his soul with exultation that 
these common men whom the rabbis regarded as mere 
“babes” could be used by God to do this great thing which 
_ the wise and learned rabbis in their pride of spirit could 
not accomplish. He found in the successes they reported 
to him on their return confirmation of his own inner 
sense of leadership that had sprung out of his profound 
religious experience with the will of God: “In that hour 
he exulted in the Holy Spirit and said, I thank thee, 
Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou didst con- 
ceal these things from the wise and learned and didst 
reveal them unto babes.” “All things have been delivered 
to me by my Father, and no one knows who the Son is 
except the Father, and who the Father is except the Son 
and he to whomsoever the Son wills to reveal him.” 

When they reported to him the satisfaction it had given 
them to see the spectacular flight of demons from the 
bodies of demoniacs, terrified by Jesus’ name, he as- 

* Lk. X:1-20. 


148 Tue Lire anp Tracuina or JEsus 


sured them that this was only a small item in comparison 
with all the wonderful experiences awaiting them in the 
New Age: “The seventy returned with joy saying, Lord, 
even the demons are subject to us by thy name. But 
he said to them . . . do not rejoice in this, that the spirits 
are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are en- 
rolled in the heavens.” Although Jesus was a popular 
prophet all through the northern country, the scribes, as 
we have seen, were bitterly opposed to him. His messen- 
gers were like sheep venturing in among a pack of wolves! 
“Behold I send you as lambs in the midst of wolves.” 
These wolfish leaders kept the ecclesiastical organizations 
of such cities of the lake region as Chorazin, Bethsaida, 
and Capernaum from giving official sanction to his move- 
ment: “Woe unto you Chorazin and Bethsaida! Tyre 
and Sidon would have done better with such a chance.” 


CHAPTER XV 


JESUS’ TEACHING ABOUT READINESS FOR 
THE COMING KINGDOM 


HE Gospels have pictured Jesus going through 
Galilee urging men and women in all the syna- 
gogues and on the Capernaum lake front to prepare 

for the Coming Kingdom and its inaugural Judgment 
Day. He has sent the Twelve out by twos to travel with 
impressive haste, scattering themselves among all the vil- 
lages and hamlets, bringing the message swiftly to every 
man’s door. Can we reconstruct this message with some 
fulness of detail? When men and women came home 
after listening to Jesus on the lake shore what did they 
report that they had heard ? 

The chief sources of information are the meager re- 
port of teaching found in Mark, and the discourse matter 
distributed through the Matthew Gospel and Luke (Q 
and matter peculiar to either Matthew or Luke, see 
p- 9). Apparently no effort has been made in either 
Matthew or Luke to arrange the teachings in the actual 
chronological order of their delivery. For instance, the 
address to the Twelve, when they were sent out into 
Galilee, occurs in the same chapter of Luke that records 
the famous conversation in the vicinity of Cssarea 
Philippi (IX), while in Matthew the two incidents are 
six chapters apart (X, XVI). The teachings of Jesus 
were probably given repeatedly in so many different places 

149 


150 Tue Lire ann Tracuina or JEsus 


and at so many different times that it would have been 
impossible for a Gospel compiler to assign many of them 
to any fixed time or place. The “Sermon on the Mount,” 
or in the hill country (Mt. V-VII), called also “the 
sermon on the plain” (Lk. VI: 20-49), is the chief ex- 
ception to this statement. But in this case the Matthew 
Gospel gathers many teachings more or legs logically, but 
not chronologically, related, if the much shorter report 
in Luke be considered as more nearly original. There is 
no indication of any essential change, as time went. on, 
in Jesus’ teaching about the nature of the righteous living 
to which men were summoned in preparation for the 
Kingdom. Therefore in considering the Galilean teaching 
we may use any pertinent material, except that found in 
the record of the last week which will be reserved for 
separate treatment. The events and teachings of these 
last days in Jerusalem would naturally, from the begin- 
ning, have been quite definitely conceived as regards time 
and place. 


Righteousness, or righteous character, was right char- 
acter, such character as God would recognize to be 
right in the Judgment Day that would introduce the King- 
dom of God. Righteous life is the kind of life that will 
be lived in the New Age aad that all expectant sons of 
the New Age must begin to live while they wait for its 
coming. | 

Jesus’ teaching about righteousness grew, largely out 
of his own religious experience, an experience affected by 
influences hoth from without and within. The vision of 


the Kingdom took shape in his own soul and all that was 


in him rose up to meet its demands. Since it was the 
Kingdom of God, it was for God that he must be ready. 


READINESS FOR THE KINGDOM 151 


An inner experience with God was evidently the dominant 
feature of his consciousness. It was this inner personal 
experience of Jesus with the energy which he taught his 
disciples to call “the will of the Heavenly Father” that 
was the source of his life and teaching. The life of God 
rose unhindered within him. All his soul was aflame 
with the feeling of the living will of God. What he in 
this way found God to be produced the great passions 
of his life, especially his great passion for righteousness, 
his “hungering and thirsting after righteousness” in him- 
self and in others. What righteousness meant in terms 
of actual life was determined by what he in his own heart 
found the will of God thrusting him out to be and do in 
the various concrete situations constantly arising in the 
daily life of man. 

Righteousness therefore was primarily a matter of the 
heart. A man in his heart found himself in contact with 
the unseen energy of the will of God, and made his 
primary adjustment to it there. It was there that the 
will of God rose thrusting him out into certain expres- 
sions of himself by word and act. He was good or bad 
as he in his heart yielded to or resisted this out-thrusting 
of the will of God, often so vague and subtle as to tax 
his understanding and give opportunity for the initiative 
essential to character. When a man faced a woman, or a 
little child, or an enemy, or any person in need,’ if he 
did not in his heart yield to the will of the Heavenly 
Father, rising there to overflow in speech and deed, he 
was bad; if he did yield, he was good. It was necessarily, 
therefore, in a heart always in contented touch with the 
will of God that the good man stores up goodness; it was 
on the rich stores of such a heart that he draws when in 
an emergency demand is made upon him for righteous 

1Mt. V:21-48, 


152 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


acts. It was likewise in the dark recesses of a heart in 
discontented touch with the will of the Heavenly Father 
that evil thoughts live and breed, ready to come out into 
the open at the bad man’s summons. Or, using another 
figure, Jesus said that the heart slowly fills up with either 
evil or good thought and feeling until the heart finally 
overflows through the mouth in speech; the heart thinks 
the foul or the false thought so persistently that finally 
suddenly, to the surprise even of the man himself, the 
foul word or the lie is spoken. “Out of the abundance 
of the heart the mouth speaketh. The good man out of 
his good treasure bringeth forth good things, and the evil 
man out of his evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.” ? 
It was “the pure in heart” who would ‘‘see God” ? in the 
radiant life of the New Age and who, by implication, 
would experience a growing awareness of his presence 
in the meantime. There were those who cleaned their 
bodies by ceremonial ablutions when they went up to the 
temple to see God; Jesus said they should clean their 
hearts. The heart is the “hot spot in consciousness,” the 
central point at which one takes up his whole life and sets 





| 
: 
4 
7 


it with supreme purpose in a certain direction. The “pure. — 


in heart” are those who with unadulterated central pur- 
pose commit all their lives to the doing of the will of God. 


More explicitly the righteous heart 1s the sincere, or 
honest heart. It is the heart that has nothing to conceal, 
that does not wish to seem, in the outer life, better than 
the heart really means at any cost to be. Jesus’ great 
summons to “repent” was in essence a summons to be 
honest, to admit the facts, to come sincerely out into the 


*Mt. XII:34-35. 
>Mt. V:8. 


READINESS FOR THE Kinapom 153 


» open, abandoning all efforts longer to conceal the inner 
state. His “woe, woe” was pronounced over the persistent 
“hypocrite.” “Hungering and thirsting for righteous- 
ness” is an exercise of the honest heart. It is hungering 
and thirsting for character and not for reputation. Its 
simple “Yes” and “No” unsupported by any oath will be 
absolutely reliable! 4 

All through the nation this bed-rock sincerity was 
needed, all men needed to repent of their varying degrees 
of insincerity. The Galilean brigands or revolutionists 
whom the Procurator Pilate had his soldiers kill at the 
very time when they were offering sacrifices at the temple 
were not specially in need of repentance. And the eighteen 
men in the Jerusalem suburb, Siloam, who were killed by 
the collapse of a tower which they were perhaps repairing, 
were not worse than other men. “Except ye repent ye 
shall all likewise perish.” > The whole nation must come 
out into the light and lay its life bare before the face 
of God. | 

Still more explicitly righteousness consists in having 
a heart that is sincere and unreserved im its “love.” We 
may anticipate here the teaching of Jesus during the last 
week of his life by citing the compact statement explicitly 
made then but implicit in all his teaching. Both Luke 
and Matthew take it from Mark. (Luke assigns it to an 
earlier period.) One of the seribes asked him, “What 
commandment is the first of all? Jesus answered, The first 
is, Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord, is one, 
and thou shalt love the Lord Thy God with all thy heart 
and with all thy soul and with all thy mind and with 
all thy strength. The second is this, Thou shalt love thy 
neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment 


*Mt. V:33-37. 
*Lk. XTII:1-5. 


154 Tue Lirk anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


greater than these.”® In the Matthew Gospel Jesus 
prefaces the second commandment by the statement that 
it is “like unto the first.”” The fundamental significance 
of these two commandments in Jesus’ idea of righteous-" 
ness becomes evident when we see what he meant by “God” 
and what he meant by “love.” The meaning of these 
words will appear in the detailed explication of them 
found in the further examination of the teaching of 
Jesus, but before proceeding to note these details the 
general viewpoint which they will reveal may be briefly 
described here. In general “love,” as Jesus used the 
word, seems to be a warm active desire to see a person 
become all that his nature indicates he ought to be, and 
to work with him, so far as it is feasible to do so, in 
the execution of every good purpose to which he sets his 
will. God, in Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God, had 
set his will toward the producing of a wise, powerful, hon- 
est and friendly race of men. ‘The unseen energy of his 
living will was rising in every man’s heart to claim it for 
the wise, honest and friendly life. His will was pushing 
all men on, in ways that sometimes seemed gentle and 
sometimes rough, to desire and produce an honest and 
friendly civilization, like that which was supposed to pre- 
vail in heaven: “Thy Kingdom come; Thy will be done 
on earth as it is in heaven.”?’ When, where and how this 
was to take place will be considered later. The point now 
is that sometime, somewhere there was to be a righteous 
race of men whose righteousness would consist in hon- 
esty, friendliness, wisdom and power manifested in each 
individual life and in all social customs, laws and insti- 
tutions. Since God had set his will toward securing such 
a result, to “love God” was to work with him to the utmost 
in securing this result. To fail to love God, that is, to 
* Mk, XII:29-30, Mt. XXII:36-37, Lk. X:27-28. 


READINESS FOR THE KINGDOM 155 


oppose him, whether actively or passively by the dead 
weight of indifference, was also necessarily to fail to 
love men, because God had set himself to do a great good 
thing for men. To “sin” against God in this way was 
also necessarily to sin against society, for God had set 
himself to produce a great and good social result. From 
Jesus’ standpoint religion and ethics are inseparable. 
Each in its very nature involves the other. The second 
great commandment is “like unto the first.” It is the 
sense of loving relationship to the Heavenly Father that is 
to serve as motive for the life of invincible good will to 
men. Because one remembers who his Father is and what ~ 
the high traditions of his family are he succeeds in loving 
even his enemies. ‘Love your enemies and pray for those 
who persecute you that you may become sons of your 
Father who is in heaven; because he makes his sun rise 
on bad and good and he rains on righteous and unrighteous. 
... Do you therefore be perfect as your Heavenly 
Father is perfect,” ™ that is, perfectly impartial in the 
outgoing love of your hearts. 


Sometimes in the teaching of Jesus emphasis is laid 
on the phase of love that looks Godward and sometimes 
on the phase of the same love that is turned toward men. 
We may look first at the places where various phases of 
loving God appear. Underlying all Jesus’ teaching about 
God is the thought of his Fatherhood, which appears in the 
passage just cited. While the idea is found earlier in 
Jewish thought and also outside of Jewish thought alto- 
gether, it appears in Jesus’ teaching as fundamental and 
with all the warmth and large dimensions of the personal 
experience of the one who felt himself to be “the Son 

™Mt. V:44-45, 48. 


156 Tue Lire anp Tracuina or JESUS 


of God, The Beloved.” The hearts of men should turn 
to God spontaneously as the hearts of children turn to 
a good father. He is responsive reality and they will 
surely find him. They should ask him freely for what 
they need. He is a generous Father, always holding out 
some good thing for his children to take. They should 
knock at his door. There igs a Father on the other side 
of the door, a Father never too busy to open the door and 
let his children in. All this Jesus repeats with a convic- 
tion born of his own personal experience. “Ask and it 
shall be given to you; seek and ye shall find; knock and 
it shall be opened unto you; for everyone that asketh re- 
ceiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that 
knocketh it shall be opened.” “If ye, then, being evil 
know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much 
more shall your Father who is in heaven give good things 
to them that ask him?’ § 

In the experience of Jesus, as we have seen, this loving 
approach to the Heavenly Father in prayer often brought 
instantaneous response. He found that what he was pray- 
ing for was happening (see p. 85). But there were situa- 
tions in which the thing prayed for could not immediately 
happen. Jesus found, too, among his disciples many who 
were not yet sufficiently developed in character to be able 
to pray as he prayed. To such Jesus said that men should 
never. cease praying, no matter how much the ills of life 
might tend to make their prayer grow faint and fitful 
and finally cease. “Men ought always to pray and not 
to faint.” In the terrible times that would precede the 
Judgment Day men would be tempted to think that the 
Heavenly Father had abandoned his children to their per- 
secutors. This they must never think. Even a judge 
who is a grafter and has no fear of God or men will in 

*Mt. VII:7-8, 11. 


READINESS FOR THE KinapomM 157 


mere self-defense yield to unwearied petition. How much 
more is it true that God will heed the prayer of his 
elect ! ° 

This loving approach to God in trustful prayer involved 
thankfulness for answered prayer. Men must not appeal 
to God for help and forget him when they have received 
it. Ten men with leprous spots, shut out from community 
life, recognized Jesus at a distance, and shouted to him 
an appeal for help. He called back to them the command 
to report to the priests in Jerusalem for a clean bill of 
health. Either immediately, or more probably later on 
their way to Jerusalem, they found that the leprous spots 
had disappeared. Only one of them, and he a Samaritan, 
made his way back to Jesus, fell at his feet and thanked 
God with exultant outcry. Jesus’ comment was: “Were 
there none found that returned to give glory to God save 
this alien %” 7° 


When men who have been bad begin to love God and 
_ therefore to work obediently with him for the honest and 
_ friendly world which his will is set to produce, they are 
said to “repent.” Their “love” mvolves “repentance.” 
Such repentance is eagerly watched for in heaven and 
causes great rejoicing among all God’s angels.14 God is 
like a watchful father always expecting the return of a 
wayward son. He finally sees him far down the road 
coming home ragged and barefoot, but with loving peni- 
tence expressed in every homeward step. He runs down 
the road to meet him, takes him in his arms, kisses him 
repeatedly and makes all the home glow with joyful wel- 
°Lk. XVIII: 1-8, cf. also Lk. XI:5-9, 


Lk. XVII:11-19. 
™ Lk. XV:7, 10. 


158 THe Lire AND TEACHING oF JESUS 


come.’ The publican, whose soul was bowed down with 
a sense of guilt which could express the beginnings of its 
love only in a penitential sob, went home from prayer in 
the temple pronounced righteous by a sympathizing God.*8 
The relation between the forgiven penitent and the gra- 
cious God is one that develops to the utmost the love that 
began in repentance. It was evident from the overflow- 
ing love in her soul that the despised wayward woman, 
who slipped into the Pharisee’s house to wet the feet of 
Jesus with her tears, had been forgiven.1* 


Love for the Heavenly Father mvolves trusting him 
to supply what his children need.’® Those who live so 
close up against the honest friendly will of God must not 
be nervously anxious, always worrying about the food 
and clothing that will soon be needed. The Father who 
is the source of man’s marvelous life can surely be trusted 
to see that his child has food enough to sustain it. The 
Father who has produced the wonderful body will surely 
provide opportunity to get a little simple clothing to put 
on it. The greater gift implies the lesser. ‘Is not the life 
more than the food and the body than the clothing?’ 
Even the birds are provided with an environment in which 
they can find food. Surely man who is so much more. 
valuable than birds will find his environment affording 
him opportunity to get food. Anyway nervous worry 
accomplishes nothing. It cannot prolong the course of 
one’s life by even so little as a single cubit. In the midst 
of cheap sparrows chirping and flying all about him, sold 


™@Lk. XV:11-24. 

Lk. XVIII:13-14. 

4% Lk. VII:47. 

* Mt. VI:25-34, Lk. XIT:22-31. 


READINESS FOR THE KINGDOM 159 


in the market at two for a penny or five for two pence, 
yet cared for by God, how can a son of God walk about 
in danger of nervous breakdown from fear that his Father 
has forgotten him! ‘Behold the birds of the heaven, that 
they sow not neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; 
and your Heavenly Father feedeth them.” In the midst 
of cheap weeds, used as fuel to cook the poor man’s meal, 
and yet clothed with beauty by God, how can the Heavenly 
Father’s child fear that God has forgotten him! To do 
so is to behave like Godless Gentiles. ‘If God so clothe 
the grass of the field which to-day is and to-morrow is cast 
into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of 
little faith?’ Men must set their hearts on God, his King- 
dom and its righteousness. With the coming of his King- 
dom and its’ civilization of wise, honest, friendly men, 
will come also all the food and clothing that men need. 
“But seek ye first his Kingdom and its righteousness; and 
all these things shall be added unto you.” 

This trust in God’s providence is one aspect of the faith 
which ts involved wn loving God. Those who lack the 
unworrying trust described in the preceding paragraph 
are said to have “little faith.” *® The word is used here 
as we have found it used before, to designate the devout 
obedient reaching up of the soul to work together with 
God for the accomplishment of his great purpose. It 
is a word involving vigorous action of the entire being. 
In the passage just discussed it does not imply that food 
and clothing come without effort into the lap of him who 
simply sits still and “trusts.” The birds are busy most 
of the time searching for food. When a man in the faith 
that involves the utmost use of all his powers lays hold 
on the will of God to work with it in love for the creation 
of an honest and friendly world, almost inconceivable re- 

* Mt. VI:30. 


160 Tuer Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


sults may be expected. Faith is like an explosive of such 
tremendous power that a minute fragment of it would 
produce something astounding. In picturesque oriental 
speech Jesus said that a bit of it no larger than a minute 
mustard seed would move a mountain, or uproot a tree 
and plant it in the ocean bed.‘ In the context of both 
these utterances Jesus was trying to shock the disciples 
out of an unsatisfactory, faithless frame of mind. In the 
Matthew context they had just failed in an attempted 
exorcism; in the Luke context they were piously asking, 
apparently with ambitious desire for spectacular power, 
to have their faith increased: “Lord, increase our faith!” 
Jesus rather brusquely informed them that they had none 
of the genuine article to start with, that no increase of 
anything they yet had would produce any result! 


On the negative side Jesus specifies one great source 
of disobedience to God, of paralyzing unfaith, of calami- 
tous unrighteousness, namely, money.?® . It stands over 
against God as his great rival, the Anti-God. Between 
these two man must make choice of a master. ‘No man 
can serve two masters.” “Ye cannot serve God and Mam- 
mon.” Jesus had probably found in his experience with 
men that it was generally their absorption in the accumu- 
lation of property that kept them from doing what he 
represented the will of God to be requiring of them. 
God was requiring them to work with his will for honesty 
and friendliness in their own hearts and in all the world. 
Jesus regarded the acquiring of property as a menace to 
the development of the friendly heart, and the complete 
devotion of one’s self to money making as absolutely de- 


Mt. XVII:20, Lk. XVII:6. 
* Mt. VI:19-24, Lk, XII:33-36, XVI:13. 


READINESS FOR THE KINGDOM 161 


structive of the friendly disposition. This will appear 
more clearly later when love for other men as an essential 
element of righteousness is discussed. In the passages 
under discussion now emphasis is laid on the fact that 
property is a phenomenon of the present age and one that 
does not last. If it is in the form of certain metals it 
will rust away, if in the form of rich clothing and rugs 
moths will eat it, and thieves are always liable to dig 
through the wall and steal it, whatever be its form. If 
one makes this his “treasure” it will get his heart. “Where 
your treasure is there will your heart be also.” The 
single heart is the undivided attention, and “what gets 
your attention gets you.” The money-making man has 
given his attention to something that will not last. He 
outlasts it and is finally left without the only thing he 
has trained himself to care for. He is therefore like a 
man in the dark, groping about after that which has dis- 
appeared, and not seeing anything that he wants. He 
should have been storing up “treasures in heaven,” that 
is, in the permanent world, the world that does not dis- 
appear. “Treasure not up for yourselves treasures on 
the earth where moth and rust disfigure, and where thieves 
dig through and steal. But treasure up for yourselves 
treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust dis- 
figures and where thieves do not dig through and steal. 
For where your treasure is, there also will be your heart.” 
As will appear later, these treasures in heaven are friend- 
ships. They endure: man does not outlast them. He 
may therefore with entire security give himself to them 
and let them get him. But he who sets his heart on acquir- 
ing property incapacitates himself for friendship and for 
working together in “faith” with the will of God for the 
creation at any cost of an honest and friendly world. 
He has not the “righteousness,” or rightness of character, 


162 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


requisite for a place in the great Empire of Friendly 
Men. | 

A man cursed with the love of money is like a body with 
a diseased eye. A healthy eye is like a lamp giving light 
to all the other members of the body so that they can do 
their work. A diseased eye leaves hands and feet in dark- 
ness. In the case of the man who loves money some faculty 
of the spiritual nature becomes diseased, fails to function 
properly and leaves a person in the dark. He cannot 
wisely decide what course to take. The faculty by which 
he discriminates between right and wrong has become 
unreliable. Such darkness is terrible; it means the ruin 
of life, the wreckage of personality. ‘The lamp of the 
body is the eye; if therefore thine eye be single (clear), 
thy whole body will be full of light. But if thine eye be 
bad thy whole body will be full of darkness. If therefore 
the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is the 
darkness !” 

It is not the rich alone that are threatened by this peril. 
The context in both Matthew and Luke ’® pictures the 
poor who worry about food and clothing as in equal dan- 
ger. They may become so absorbed in the anxious struggle 
for the necessities of life that they become incapacitated 
for friendship. Their disposition easily becomes essen- 
tially the same as that of the rich. The rich may be 
satisfied because they have money; the poor dissatisfied 
because they do not have it. The poor may be bent on 
getting money; the rich bent on keeping it. 


A passage found only in the Matthew Gospel emphasizes 
the fact that in the case of the truly righteous all outer 
religious activities spring from love for God and are 

* Mt. VI:25-34, Lk. XII:22-34. 


READINESS FOR TIE KINapomM 163 


engaged in with no desire for public applause, but only 
for the approval that the loving Father will make his chil- 
dren feel in the secrecy of their hearts.2® There are those 
who with pretentious, though spurious, righteousness give 
alms to the needy in such a way as to secure public notice. 
They get the publicity that they seek, but they lose the 
invaluable sense of God’s approval in their hearts. The 
true children of God slip their alms into the hands of 
their needy brothers so unobtrusively that the donor’s left 
hand does not see what the right hand is doing. Jesus 
had himself probably often given alms in this way and 
had felt the incomparable joy of the Heavenly Father’s 
approval. “Take heed that ye do not your righteousness 
before men, to be seen of them: else ye have no reward 
with your Father who is in heaven. When therefore thou 
doest. alms, sound not a trumpet before thee, as the hypo- 
erites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they 
may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have 
received their reward. But when thou doest alms, let not 
thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth.” ?? 

There were those who took pains to have the prayer 
hour overtake them in some public place, on a busy street 
corner or at the synagegue which was a kind of community 

Mt. VI:1-8, 16-18. 

™Mt. VI:1-3. This passage and VI:5-8, 16-18 are very likely 
parts of Q that Luke did not use. They have probably been modi- 
fied by the compiler of the Matthew Gospel. In ch. XXIII the term 
“hypocrite” is, as here, freely applied to the scribes, but in Luke’s 
parallel report the word does not appear. The Matthew Gospel 
was produced in an environment in which there was great hostility 
between the church and the synagogue (p. 16). The shaping hand 
of the compiler may not have stopped with the introduction of the 
word “hypocrite.” The underlying teaching of the paragraph, how- 
ever, is thoroughly in accord with the general tenor of Jesus’ teach- 
ing. If Jesus had the scribes in mind here it was, as has been noted 


before, because it was, presuinably, the worst element in Pharisaism 
that arrayed itself against him. 


164 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


house, where there would often be a group of susceptible 
people. The loving child of God seeks his Father in the 
inmost chamber behind the shut door and experiences there 
the deep satisfaction of his Father’s presence.?* Jesus in 
his Nazareth days may have seemed less prayerful than 
some others often found at the synagogue, but his praying 
heart had found some secluded place for prayer. There 
were those who, when they fasted, distorted their faces 
with pious gloom and went impressively about among the 
admiring crowds with the uncombed hair and unwashed 
face of the habitual ascetic. The loving child of God, 
as Jesus half humorously pictures him, when he has occa- 
sion for penitential fasting, uses hair oil, washes his face, 
and goes along the street as cheerfully as if going to or 
from a feast! The Heavenly Father gives him as inner 
reward the tender sense of forgiven sin.?? The funda- 
mental fault in these spurious specialists in righteousness 
was that they ignored the chief factor in the situation, 
the living God. It was as if a farmer, exhibiting his stock 
at the fair, should ignore the presence of the committee on 
awards and be swollen with pride over the attention he 
attracts from a crowd of small boys. 


The best picture of men turning in righteous love to 
God, looking with the full energy of penitent faith for the 
Coming Kingdon, is found in the prayer of the righteous 
men taught by Jesus to his disciples. They stand together, 
one in spirit, all hearts turned intently toward their com- 
mon Father in the unseen heavenly world. They wish 
all men and angels to bow in reverence when his Holy 
Name is heard. With the full energy of active faith they 


™Mt. VI:5-8. 
*= Mt. VI:16-18. 


READINESS FOR THE KiINGpoM 165 


wish to see the earth filled with the honest and friendly 
men of his Kingdom, finally doing his will on earth as 
perfectly as it is being done in heaven. They trustfully 
look to him as the source of food and the life that food 
sustains. They have forgiven their enemies as the chil- 
dren of a Heavenly Father ought to do, and so ask confi- 
dently for the inner sense of his forgiveness. In these 
last days before the Kingdom comes, while the dominion 
of the Evil One on earth is not yet ended, they pray, with 
humble self-distrust, not to be treated as stronger than 
they are, not to be made to test their powers in conflict 
with the Evil One (Jesus remembered his own fierce 


conflict), but rather to be rescued from his ruinous 
designs. ”4 


*The “Lord’s Prayer” is found in two forms: Mt. VI:9-13, Lk. 
XI:2-4. Probably Luke gives, as often, the form more nearly like 
that found in Q. It is a brief list of prayer topics given, according 
to Luke, in response to the request of a disciple for such forms of 


prayer as John the Baptist had composed for his disciples (Lk. XI:1, 
V:33). 


CHAPTER XVI 


JESUS’ TEACHING ABOUT READINESS FOR 
THE COMING KINGDOM (Continued) 


Coming Kingdom is comprehensively described by 

Jesus as consisting in a sincerely loving heart. 
We have seen what Jesus taught about the different re- 
actions of such a heart when turned Godward. How 
ought such a heart to manifest itself in the circle of human 
relations? As the will of God is allowed to rise freely 
in the souls of men to express itself in the honest and 
friendly life, what sort of actions will result? The gen- 
eral principle ts that a man’s love for his neighbor shall 
be as strong and reliable as his love for himself: “Thou 
shali love thy neighbor as thyself.” To love a person is to 
have a warm active desire to see him develop into all that 
his nature indicates he ought to become, and to have, so 
far as is consistent with the common good, whatever will 
conduce to this end. To ignore the common good in wish- 
ing him well would be to fail to “love” the rest of the 
neighbors. To love one’s neighbor as himself does not 
involve coddling the other man, making things over-easy 
for him, doing things for him that he ought to do for 
himself, because one would not coddle himself. Such 
treatment would not be conducive to the development of 
character either in one’s self or in another. Neither does 
loving one’s neighbor as himself mean ignoring one’s own 
interests in the effort to safeguard similar interests in the 

166 


. S we have seen, the righteousness that fits for the 


READINESS FOR THE KINGDOM 167 


life of another man. If I allowed another man to sacrifice 
his interest in order to advance mine, I should lose my 
self-respect. I must, therefore, not treat another man in 
such a way as to inflict on him the loss of his self-respect. 
The requirement evidently means coming to the other man 
on the level, a pooling of interests, a true “brotherhood,” 
in which each man is as solicitous for the other man’s 
welfare as he is for his own. Or, more fundamentally, 
since in Jesus’ teaching the Kingdom is always in view, 
and a kingdom is always a civilization, a social order, 
Jesus’ principle means that men shall work together in 
reciprocal good will, in mutual sacrifice, for the common 
good. It does often happen that one individual makes a 
particular sacrifice for the common good that another in- 
dividual does not make, though both are ready to make 
it if called upon to do so. It does often happen also that 
one man makes absolute sacrifice of his own lower in- 
terest for the sake of securing a higher interest in the life 
of another. He lays down his life in the defense of an- 
other’s honor or for the sake of developing the character 
of others, as a missionary martyr does. But this he would 
do in his own case; he would die in defence of his own 
honor or for the development of his own character in 
loyalty to his highest ideals. It does not mean that all 
men are to be treated alike. The common good will deter- 
mine the treatment accorded each. The man preparing to 
be a physician must be given special educational advan- 
tages that would not be given to another. Special safe- 
guards must be thrown around one who is the only physi- 
clan in a community during a dangerous epidemic. 


Another presentation of general principle is found in 
Jesus’ statement that if anyone wished to be a great man 


168 Tue Lire anp Tracuine or JESUS 


in the group of those waiting for the Kingdom of God, 
he must be the “servant” of the others, and that whoever 
wished to be “first” must be “everybody’s bondslave.” 4 
This is an impressive way of emphasizing what Jesus had 
just been saying, namely, that in the empire of honesty 
and friendliness men would not delight in the sort of 
primacy that would enable them to “lord it over” others. 
“Ye know that those who are accounted to rule (in esteem 
for ruling?) over the Gentiles lord it over them and their 
great ones exercise authority over them. But it is not so 
among you.” The limit set for one’s “service” to another 
is determined by the object of the service, which is to 
arouse in the other responsive good will and wholesome 
action. The fundamental elements in character are friend- 
ship and work; any kind of “service” that weakens either 
element is harmful. The mother who becomes her chil- 
dren’s “bondservant” in any way that impairs their char- 
acter is not acting in accordance with this principle. 

It is also said by Jesus that one must “deny himself 
and take up his cross.” * To deny one’s self is to deny to 
one’s self the right to supreme consideration. It means 
bringing the interests of others up abreast of one’s own, 
loving one’s neighbor as himself. To “take up his cross” 
is to carry his “self-denial” to the point of* preparing 
for execution by crucifixion as Jesus at the time was doing. 
Whoever shrinks from this, and ‘‘would save his life, shall 
lose it.” That is, whoever concentrates attention simply 
on saving his own life, thereby fails to deny to himself 
the right to supreme consideration, fails to love his neigh- 
bor as himself. This makes friendship an impossibility 
and so occasions the loss of life in the Coming Kingdom 
where life consists in growing friendships. 


1Mk. X:43-44. 
?Mk. VIII:34-35, 


READINESS FOR THE Kinqpom 169 


Jesus’ general principle is presented in another form: 
“As ye would that men should do to you do ye also to them 
likewise.” * This means that a man should treat his 
fellowman as he would feel that he himself ought to be 
treated tf he were in the other man’s place. It does not 
mean that an officer should yield to a man in the ranks 
the obedience that is an officer’s due; but that he should 
treat a private as he would feel that he ought to be treated 
by an officer if he were a private. It is an appeal for 
the square deal, for such conduct in any transaction as 
will make each one who participates in it feel that all the 
others were as considerate of his interests as they were 
of their own. No one wished any special privileges for 
himself in the deal unless possibly they were essential to 
the common good. To desire special privileges for the 
sake of enjoying them degrades their possessor: ‘For 
everyone that exalteth himself shall be humbled and he 
that humbleth himself shall be exalted.” + The one who 
“exalts himself” is “humbled,” or degraded, not by any 
arbitrary act of God but as a natural consequence of his 
self-exalting disposition. Such a disposition necessarily 
stunts his growth, blights his being, makes him less than 
he would otherwise be. To wish for special privileges 
simply for the sake of enjoying them is to transgress the 
deepest law of his being. The man who “does his 
righteousness before men to be seen of them” ® is guilty 
not only of the sinful blunder of ignoring God (p. 164) 
but also of the great sin of wishing certain of his fellow- 
men to be less than himself. If all others should make as 
good an appearance as he does in his spectacular fasting, 
alms giving and praying, his own pre-eminence would be 

*Mt. VII:12, Lk. VI:31. 


‘Lk, XIV:11, Mt. XXIII:12. 
‘Mt. VI:1. 


170 Tue Lirz anp TErAcHING or JESUS 


gone. He must have others less than himself to serve as 
background against which to display his own superiority. 
On the other hand the man who humbles himself, that is, 
who either surrenders special privileges or, more probably, 
does his utmost to share them with others and make them 
commonplace, thereby develops a disposition that “exalts” 
him, lifts him up to the heights of friendly life and char- 
acter. It was this disposition that Jesus found in the 
normal child.® 

It is not easy to be always giving the same generous 
consideration to the interests of others that one gives to 
his own, to be always working for the common good, to 
be always eager to share one’s special distinction. It is 
simple, but not easy. Yet it is the essential element in 
the righteous civilization of the Kingdom of the friendly 
sons of God. Jesus probably had this in mind when he 
said that the gateway into “life,” that is, into the King- 
dom, was “narrow” and that he found few passing through 
it,* 


The teaching of Jesus about the righteousness that con- 
sists in sincere regard for other men appears not only 
in the general statements just discussed but in the specifica- 
tion of certain details. The “Sermon on the Mount,” 
especially in the form preserved in the Matthew Gospel, 
contains a number of such.? Among the “blessed,” ® that 
is, those who are to be congratulated as prospective citizens 


*Mt. XVIII: 1-4. 

*Mt. VII:13-14, Lk. XIII:24. 

*Some of them, probably parts of Q which Luke omitted; others 
parts of Q which Luke reports in a more nearly original form, e.g., 
“Blessed are ye poor” (Lk.), “Blessed are the poor in spirit” (Mt.) ; 
some perhaps taken from some other source than Q. 

°Mt. V:3-12. 


READINESS FOR THE KinapoM 171 


of the Kingdom of Heaven, are those who are “poor in 
spirit.’ They are those who in spirit feel like poor men, 
those who are full of sympathy for the men who lack 
what they themselves perhaps have in abundance. They 
may be rich (the Matthew Gospel does not commend pov- 
erty as Luke seems to do), but they have not forgotten 
how it feels to be poor; they may be successful, but they 
have not forgotten how it feels to fail; they may be saints, 
but they have not forgotten how it feels to be a sinner. 
They are those who know how to comfort mourners with 
such beautiful friendliness as to make the mourning blessed 
because it called out such comfort. They are the “meek,” 
that is, those who with due consciousness of their own 
limitations, with no over-emphasis of their own excellen- 
cies, hold themselves ready to contribute to the common 
good; they wish for no special privileges. Such persons 
will possess the earth in the New Age of the Coming 
Kingdom. In another passage peculiar to Matthew prob- 
ably taken from Q ?° it is said that they will find “rest,” 
that is, contentment, enlargement of life, assurance re- 
garding the future. Jesus had found it in this way. 
“Learn of me for I am meek and lowly in heart, and ye 
shall find rest unto your souls.” They are the merciful, 
quick to relieve need, not holding a grudge, hearty and 
dependable in their forgiveness of those who repent. They 
are the “peace makers’ ; they do all they can to produce 
real peace, to produce a situation in which men work 
together in good will for the common good. These quali- 
ties make them the “salt of the earth,” ** that which pre- 
serves civilization from decay.1” They keep men bound 


Mt. XI:28-30. 

Mt. V213: 

4 Salt here is not thought of in the small quantities used for sea- 
soning food, but rather in the large quantities used for the preserva- 


172 Tue Lire ann Tracuine or JESUS 


together in the wholesome friendly relations that make 
community life of a high order possible. They are “the 
light of the world” ; ** they create an atmosphere in which 
the work of the world can be successfully done. By virtue 
of what they are they bring light to the dark spots of life. 
At their approach sorrows seem. less oppressive, burdens 
grow lighter, temptations to evil lose something of their 
power. : 

In this context strong emphasis is further laid on the 
necessity of a kindly feeling for others wn the heart. It is 
not simply necessary to refrain from killing a fellow- 
man, but to refrain from the ill will in the heart that 
develops into the murder. Jesus expressed hot indigna- 
tion at those who could speak of another man in terms of 
contempt. He apparently caught up certain current 
epithets expressive of contempt, “raca,” “good for noth- 
ing,” “moreh,” “insignificant fellow.” ‘4 They do not ex- 
press honest dignified moral criticism like the term “hypo- 
crite,” which was evidently sometimes on the lips of Jesus, 
even if the Matthew Gospel exaggerated the frequency of 
its use (p. 163), but rather a supercilious sense of glad 
superiority which sees no moral potentiality in another 
and does not desire to see it. It was useless for a man 
to attempt to worship God with a gift so long as he had 
failed to right a wrong done to some neighbor. He might 
be in the very act of sacrifice, when he remembered what 
he had done, but must lay his offering down by the altar 


tion of fish. Such “salt,” when nothing but its impurities remained 
(popularly still called “salt”), could only be “cast out to be trodden 
underfoot of men,” that is, to make foothpaths. 

oMt. V:14-16. 

4 Mt. V:21-22. Perhaps they were terms freely applied by the 
synagogue to Christians in the environment of the Matthew Gospel. 
The gradations of punishment mentioned seem to reflect local usage 
of Jesus’ own day or later. 


READINESS FOR THE KINGDOM 173 


and let the priest wait for him to have an interview with 
his injured neighbor, even though this might involve re- 
tracing his steps over a long expensive journey by land 
and sea.?° There must be no such ill will in the heart 
as is expressed by the refusal to pay one’s debts, the re- 
fusal to give to another what belongs to him. Some 
of the early Christians, perhaps because expecting the 
world soon to end, seem to have thought it unnecessary to 
pay their debts, especially debts owed to persons who would 
be destroyed in the Judgment anyway (cf. Rom. XIIT: 
8-10, I Thess. [V: 11-12)! Jesus, speaking as a business 
man with a keen sense of honor, said dishonest debtors 
ought not to be let out of jail until they had “paid the 
last farthing.” 1® There must be no such ill will toward 
a woman as would tolerate lust in the heart. The glance 
or gesture that invited to such an act should be fiercely 
repressed ; the offending eye be plucked out, the offend- 
ing hand cut off. There must be such kindly considera- 
tion for a wife as would never divorce her except for one 
most serious reason (cf. p. 278). A man must not feel 
that he had done his duty by an offending wife when he 
had given her a written statement of his reasons for 
divorcing her, a statement that would often give her 
standing in the community as a marriageable woman.}” 
There must be such regard for a fellow man as would 
not simply keep one faithful to an oath but faithful to his 
simple word unsupported by any oath.*® There must be 
- such regard for the other man as would not simply limit 
revenge—confining it to an eye for an eye and a tooth 
for a tooth—but as would refrain from revenge altogether. 


* Mt. V:23. 

*Mt. V:25-26. 

"Mt. V:28-32, cf. Mt. XIX:9. In Lk, XVI:18 and Mk. X:11-12 
the prohibition of divorce seems subject to no exception. 

* Mt. V:33-37. 


174 Tue Lire anp TEAcHine oF JESUS 


There must be such love for the other man as would be 
ready to let him have more than he might try to get, 
either by violence or request. The outflow of good will 
from the heart of a man into the life of his fellow man 
‘is to be so strong and steady that no injury done to 
either property or person can stop it.*® It is easy to 
conceive cases in which literal obedience to some of these 
teachings would defeat their spirit, but the spirit of re- 
gard for the other man that they aim to produce is unmis- 
takable. This spirit is to do away with all censorious 
criticism, all eager delight in diagnosing and operating on 
the faults of other men.”° In all this teaching Jesus was 
“fulfilling,” “filling out,” the law of Moses (Mt. v:17), 
going all the way where the law went only part way. 


The spirit of good will to the other man finds concrete 
expression in an unwearying readiness to forgive. 
Forgiveness implies three things: a wrong done; the wrong 
repented and made right; and then the change from dis- 
approving love to approving love on the part of the one 
who suffered the wrong. Jesus urges the one who has 
suffered the wrong to be aggressive in forgiveness. Since 
he has not been guilty of the wrong doing he is presum- 
ably more amenable to high moral considerations than the 
offender. Evidently there can be no forgiveness until 
there has been repentance. This is distinctly asserted in 
Luke’s report of the teaching: “If thy brother sin rebuke 
him: if he repent forgive him.” 7? The offended party 


2 Mt. V:38-42. 
* Mt. VII:1-5. 
™ Mt. XVIII:15, 21-22, Lk. XVII:3-4. 
™Lk, XVII:3. 


READINESS FOR THE KINGDOM 175 


could not honestly and righteously look with approving 
love on a person who was persisting in wrong doing. God 
- looks upon such a person with disapproval and so must 
every right-minded man. But the offended party must do 
everything in his power to produce the repentance that 
is the essential condition of forgiveness. The obligation 
to forgive involves the obligation to do all that can be done 
to make forgiveness possible. Rebuke becomes a duty. 
The Matthew Gospel adds some matter here which assumes 
the existence of a “church” and church relationships and 
is, therefore, probably an amplification of the teaching of 
Jesus made by the early Christian prophets or evan- 
gelists.22. The object of the rebuke which makes forgive- 
ness possible is said to be to “gain a brother’; “if he hear 
thee thou hast gained thy brother.” Therefore it is neces- 
sary to go to him alone and not humiliate him by publicly 
taxing him with his fault. If this does not produce re- 
pentance the moral force of two or three others must be 
brought to bear upon him. If this persuasive committee 
of brothers does not move him, the moral force of the 
public sentiment of the whole brotherhood must be called 
out. If this does not awaken within him the spirit of 
penitent brotherliness, he cannot be allowed to remain 
in the group of disciples, for the essential. characteristic 
of the group is brotherly regard for each other. The 
group will look upon him as the synagogue looks on 
publicans and sinners, namely, as a perverse outsider. 
If the Matthew Gospel was formed in an environment 
where church and synagogue were in frequent collision 
(p. 16), to fall out of the church often meant to go to 
the synagogue. There would, therefore, be considerable 
pungency in designating such a convert, or re-convert, 
to the synagogue as like a “publican and a sinner”! The 
* Mt. XVIII:16-17. 


176 Tue Lire anp Tracuing or JEsus 


Matthew Gospel adds a parable 2* which emphasizes the 
necessity of having the forgiving spirit if one would be 
righteous before God. It presents the wicked absurdity of 
refusing to forgive a fellow man after having one’s self 
been forgiven by God. A man who had been forgiven 
a debt of twelve million dollars, which he could not pos- 
sibly pay, went instantly out, grabbed by the throat a 
man who owed him seventeen dollars and mercilessly com- 
mitted him to the debtor’s prison. The parable is intro- 
duced by the statement that the forgiving disposition must 
be fastened upon one as a fixed habit. Seven times a day, 
day after day, month after month, it must continue. 


There must be an eternally enduring eagerness to “gain a 
brother.” 5 


*Mt. XVIII:23-34. 
* Mt. XVIII:22, Lk. XVII:4. 


CHAPTER XVII 


JESUS’ TEACHING ABOUT READINESS FOR 
THE COMING KINGDOM (Concluded) 


UKE’S Gospel contains a great deal of teaching 
peculiar to itself, regarding the righteousness that 
consists in the kindly treatment of other men. At 

the forefront of the Gospel stands Jesus’ proclamation of 
his great program stated in terms of human sympathy 
and relief of human need. Poor people are to have good 
news preached to them; captives are to be released; the 
blind are to receive their sight; the heavily handicapped, 
the bruised and the crippled, are to be given liberty.* 
Jesus illustrates his great principle that neighbor love 
leads to the life of the New Age by the story of the kindly 
Samaritan traveller whose heart was full of sympathy 
for the half dead victim of brigands. He gave him pains- 
taking personal attention on the spot and provided for 
his future need by an adequate gift of money. Jesus 
contrasted this practical illustration of true righteousness, 
true fitness for the New Age, with the conduct of those 
who were supposed to be unquestionably and conspicu- 
ously ready for it, the priest and the Levite.* In the 
immortal story of the Lost Son Found Again, the point 
of emphasis, as indicated by the context, is the unbrotherly 
conduct of the older son. Instead of saying “This my 
*Lk. IV:18-19. 
*Lk. X :28-42. 
177 


178 Tus Lire ann Txacurne or Jzsus 


brother was lost and is found,” he was angered by the 
father’s welcome and would not go in to see his brother.® 


Luke represents Jesus to have conceived of prayer as a 
species of spiritual activity by which a man might get 
something for a friend in need. It is as if a man at mid- 
night should find standing at his door a friend on a journey 
tired and hungry in the midnight darkness. He has 
nothing to set before the needy traveller. He goes, there- 
fore, to a well supplied home near at hand and says: 
“Friend, lend me three loaves for a friend of mine is 
come to me from a journey and I have nothing to set be- 
for him.” * The praying man stands between the friendly 
God and the friendly neighbor in need. Many interesting 
questions arise in connection with this subject. The point 
just now is that the praying man who is fit for the New 
Age is the man who wishes to share with his neighbor the 
supplies of feeling and thought that can be drawn by 
prayer in accordance with psychic laws from the environ- 
ing will of God. It will appear in a moment that Jesus 
in Luke’s picture of him required men who would be 
righteous to share with their neighbors whatever wealth 
they could draw from their physical environment. So 
must they also, to be righteous, share with others what- 
ever they draw from their spiritual environment by the 
expenditure of spiritual energy in prayer. 


This righteous good will toward fellowmen is to show 
itself in social courtestes.© Home and hospitality were 
*Lk. XV:11-32, 


*Lk. XI:5-8. 
SLk. XIV:7-14. 


READINESS FOR THE KinapomM 179 


great values to be shared with the homeless and needy 
in the community, and not to be used with a view to se- 
curing return invitations into thé so-called upper circles 
of society. “When thou makest a dinner or a supper call 
not thy friends nor thy brethren, nor thy kinsmen, nor 
rich neighbors, lest haply they also bid thee again and a 
recompense be made thee. But when thou makest a feast 
bid the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind; and thou 
shalt be blessed . . . thou shalt be recompensed in the 
resurrection of the righteous.” This latter statement 
seems at first glance to keep the whole matter still on a 
commercial basis. Whether this is really so depends upon 
the nature of life in the New Age, Jesus’ view of which 
will appear later. In the same connection (vs. 7-10) 
Jesus openly commented with genial humor on the quiet 
rivalries going on among his fellow guests as they ma- 
neuvred for the best places at the dinner party of a 
Pharisee. The unfriendly desire to see another guest in 
an inferior position seemed to Jesus 'to be utterly out of 
harmony with the simple spirit of good will that would 
prevail in the Kingdom of God. At the Messianic banquet 
in the Kingdom of God there would be no such social 
climbing. With a quiet humor, tinged perhaps with a 
trace of sarcasm, he pointed out a shrewd way to secure 
the social glorification that each seemed bent on getting 
for himself: “When thou art bidden go and sit down in 
the lowest place; that when he that hath bidden thee 
cometh, he may say to thee, Friend, go up higher; then 
shalt thou have glory of all that sit at meat with thee!” 

The purpose of all social occasions is to stimulate friend- 
liness. Therefore friendly conversation and not an ex- 
travagant menu ought to be their chief characteristic. In 
a collection of miscellaneous teachings and incidents re- 
ported by Luke in connection with Jesus’ leisurely jour- 


180 Tue Lire anp Tracuina or JEsus 


ney to Jerusalem an incident is cited to illustrate this.® 
Jesus apears as a guest in the home of a woman named 
Martha. This woman, with the spirit of oriental hospi- 
tality strong within her, set about providing a large num- 
ber of things to eat. Her sister Mary, on the contrary, 
gave herself wholly up to listening to Jesus’ conversation. 
When Martha resented this, Jesus protested against her 
strenuous effort to provide so many things to eat and 
said that a few things, or even only one thing, would be 
enough. Mary had been wiser and should be let alone. 


Jesus’ teaching that righteousness involves invincible 
good will toward fellowmen appears in the prominence 
given by Luke to his discussion of the proper use of money. 
In matter common to both Luke and Matthew, on this 
point, the Lukan picture seems almost ascetic. In the 
Sermon on the Mount blessing is pronounced on the poor 
and the hungry instead of on the poor in spirit and those 
that hunger after righteousness. A woe upon the rich 
and well fed is added.?. The renouncing of all possessions 
seems twice to be required of all disciples,’ rather than of 
the one individual to whom according to Mark a special 
place in the inner circle of disciples was offered. Where 
Luke says, “Sell your possessions and give alms,” the 
Matthew Gospel reports: “Do not treasure up for your 
selves treasures on earth,” a protest against accumulating 
riches.® This statement in Luke is not limited to the 
Twelve when Jesus is given an opportunity to make such 
limitation.?° 

*Lk. X:38-42. 

™Lk, VI:20-25, Mt. V:3, 6. 

*Lk. XII:33, XIV:33. 


*°Lk. XII:33, Mt. VI:19. 
* Lk. XII:41. 


READINESS FoR THE KINa@poM 181 


Luke has very dramatic material on this point peculiar 
to himself in chapters XII and XVI. A man in the crowd, 
whose brother had cheated him out of his share of their 
father’s estate, appealed to Jesus: “‘And one out of the 
multitude said unto him, Teacher, bid my brother divide 
the inheritance with me.” Jesus brusquely refused the 
man’s request and proceeded to warn the crowd that life 
does not consist in the abundance of the things that a 
man owns. He then pictured for them the dramatic 
career of a man whose philosophy of life was based on 
the supposition that true life does consist in a growing 
estate and luxurious living.*1 The prosperous Syrian 
farmer kept building larger barns and encouraging his 
soul to set to and have a good time. No one but himself 
appears in the picture which is, therefore, in fatal con- 
trast with the picture of the friendly Samaritan. He was 
suddenly summoned from life by the angelic officials of 
the great assize: “God said unto him, This night they are 
asking for thy soul!’ He started on the solemn journey 
friendless and alone, leaving his “things” to be anyone’s 
plunder: “The things which thou hast prepared, whose 
shall they be?’ Jesus said that God called him a blun- 
dering fool. He had fooled away his life. 

More explicit is Jesus’ teaching based on the illustra- 
tion of the shrewd steward who knew how to make friends 
by the use of his position against a day of reckoning 
when he would need friends and home.” He was a true 
“son of this age,” the age which the devil was supposed 
to dominate, but nevertheless something could be learned — 
from his disreputable career by the “sons of light,” 
namely, that a man ought to use his money in a friendly 
way, as for instance the friendly Samaritan did. ‘Make 


™Lk. XIT:13-21. 
37k. XVI:1-12. 


182 Tur Lire anp Treacuina or JEsus 


to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of un- 
righteousness; that when it shall fail they may receive you 
into the eternal tabernacles.” Men who use their money 
righteously in the interest of others lay the foundations 
of everlasting friendships. When the end comes and their 
souls are asked for they will find friends on the other side 
to welcome them into the everlasting homes of the Com- 
ing Kingdom. One. shows whether or not he is really 
righteous by the use he makes of his money. Money is 
an insignificant thing; it is the straw that shows which 
way the wind blows. “He that'is faithful in a very little 
is faithful also in much” (v. 10). If one does not learn 
how to use this low, superficial form of power in a friendly 
way, how can God trust him with the real and higher 
forms of power that will characterize life in the real and 
higher world of the Coming Kingdom?. “If therefore ye 
have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who 
will commit to your trust the true riches?” (v. 11). Money 
is a temporary power, coming to one often from another 
by inheritance, certain to pass into the hands of another 
at death. If one does not learn to use this transient form 
of power in a friendly way, how can God trust him with 
the permanent forms of power that will characterize the 
permanent civilization of the Coming Kingdom? “And 
if ye have not been faithful in that which is another’s, 
who will give you that which is your own?” (v, 12). 
Then follows the picture of a man who refused to use his 
money in the friendly relief of the sick beggar at his 
door.1 He and his banqueting friends passed the sick 
beggar daily, less attentive to him than the dogs were! 
In the other world the rich man went into the fiery sec- 
tion of Hades where there were no friends to receive him 
into blessed homes and where the accomplished banqueter 
*Lk. XVI:19-31. 


READINESS FOR THE KINGDOM 183 


could find not even a drink of water. The poor beggar, 
on the other hand, banqueted in heaven and as a new- 
comer was given the place of honor next to Father 
Abraham himself. A deep impassable gorge shut the 
rich man off from the realm of friendship. The sub- 
ject of Jesus’ teaching about riches will come up again 
later (p. 284). It is in point here to show that it bulked 
large in his Galilean teaching regarding the nature of the 
righteousness that constituted readiness for the Coming 
Kingdom. 


We have so far seen that Jesus’ teaching about right- 
eousness grew out of his own religious experience, that he 
conceived it to be the output in action of a sincere and 
overflowing heart, a heart full of love to God and, there- 
fore, necessarily full of love to men. One other aspect of 
righteousness appears in the Galilean preaching—loyalty 
to the person of Jesus. At a later time, when the Gospels 
were being made and Jesus was known to have been the 
Messiah, this loyalty to his person naturally meant loyalty 
to him as Messiah. But during the Galilean period now 
under discussion Jesus was not thought by the public to 
be the Messiah, perhaps not by his own disciples, nor, in 
the specialized technical sense of the title, even by himself 
(p. 77). Nevertheless, loyalty to him as the prophet 
of the Kingdom-At-Hand necessarily became to a certain 
extent an element in righteous readiness for the Kingdom. 
His own personality became identified with his message. 
The fact that his message was born out of his own ex- 
perience, and, therefore, delivered with authority, and 
also the fact that it was backed up by such manifestations 
of power in direct exorcisms and healings emphasized his 
own personality. Furthermore, the fact that he was a 


184 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


teaching rabbi gathering disciples led to the formation of 
a party about his person. After he had been declared by 
the scribal leaders to be a product of hell bearing a message 
from hell (p. 118), it became natural for all who believed 
his message to champion his person and emphatically 
assert their devotion to him as leader. Lines were sharply 
drawn between those who were for and against Jesus, the 
prophet, and loyalty to him would naturally be thought 
of as involved in righteous readiness for the Kingdom. 
At a later time, when he had begun to express the expecta- 
tion of meeting a violent death, there appear strong 
statements about the necessity of a loyalty that would not 
shrink from dying with him. But also in the earlier 
period it was perfectly natural to say that loyalty to him 
might divide a family and that the one who deserted him, 
the prophet of God, and his ideals of righteousness because 
of opposition in his own family was unworthy of such a 
leader and such a goal. The interests at stake were so 
eternally vital that, in the tense language of Luke’s Gos- 
pel, one might well “hate” the members of his family who 
by opposition to Jesus were dragging him down with 


themselves to ruin in the rapidly approaching Judgment — 


Day.’* The most merciful way of arousing the family to 
a sense of its impending doom would be to break abruptly 
away from it and hurry off to the group gathered about 
the Prophet of the Kingdom. The same urgent necessity 
of being identified with the Prophet and his group appears 
in another passage from Q.1° A man who had been inter- 
ested in Jesus’ message and was either already among the 
general group of Jesus’ larger circle of disciples (Mt.), 
or seemed open to an invitation from Jesus (Lk.), said 
that he must break away from the group long enough to 


“Mt. X:34-37, Lk. XIV:26. 
* Mt, VIII:21-22, Lk. TX :59-60, 


oe en ee 


ReapDINEss FOR THE KINGDOM 185 


go home and bury his father. It seems hardly probable 
that this referred to the few hours of absence necessary for 
immediate burial, which usually occurred on the very 
day of the death. The death of his father was probably 
expected to occur soon and he wished to be on hand to 
bury him when he died. Jesus insisted that those who 
were spiritually dead to the nearness of the Judgment 
Day could be left to bury the physically dead, and that 
this man’s duty was to follow him as a member of the 
group that with tense expectation waited for the King- 
dom, and were busy in eagerly publishing their expecta- 
tion. (‘‘Do thou go and proclaim the Kingdom of God,” 
Lk.) 

The Matthew Gospel pictures. one of the scribes, the 
class usually antagonistic to Jesus (Lk., “a certain man”), 
insisting that he would loyally follow Jesus wherever he 
should go.'® Jesus with a touch of humor gives an 
answer which implies that the scribe will find none of 
the things ordinarily sought for by men of his class, chief 
seats at dinner parties, and other forms of social prestige.?7 
The wandering prophet of the Kingdom is more homeless 
than beast or bird! “The foxes have holes and the birds 
of the air have nests but the Son of Man hath not where 
to lay his head.” The insertion of the Messianic title 
“Son of Man” here was perfectly natural in the period 
when the Gospels were forming and Jesus’ true character 
was known, but cannot have been on the lips of Jesus dur- 
ing the Galilean period (p. 102). 

We have to think of all this rich Galilean section with 
its busy cities, orchards and fields as thoroughly traversed 
by Jesus and his assistants. The minds of men and women 
were everywhere being turned to the Coming Kingdom. 


%* Mt. VIII:19-20, Lk. IX :57-58. 
* Of, Mk. XII:38-39. 


186 Tue Lire AND TEACHING oF JESUS 


They were confronted with the standards of righteousness 
that the prophet Jesus said would be applied to the lives 
of men in the rapidly approaching Judgment Day. What 
was the effect on the life of the people? This Jesus pro- 
ceeds to tell. 


CHAPTER XVIII 


JESUS’ ESTIMATE OF HIS WORK IN GALILEE; 
PARABLES OF THE KINGDOM 


about the righteousness that constitutes readiness 

for the Coming Kingdom is found in certain 
“parables.” + In Mark’s Gospel three which serve this 
purpose are selected from a large number.” They were 
spoken when Jesus had been teaching throughout Galilee 
for a considerable time, just after the crisis in his con- 
flict with the scribes occasioned by their publication of 
_ the theory that he was in league with Beelzeboul and just 
before he proceeded to intensify his teaching campaign 
by sending out the Twelve. The intervening matter in 
Mark (IV: 35-V: 43) occupied only a few hours, or in- 
cluding the visit to Nazareth (VI: 1-6), only a few days. 
There has been introduced at this point into Mark’s 
Gospel, and carried over from Mark into Matthew and 
Luke, a theory that prevailed in the Gospel making period 
regarding the reason why Jesus ever used parables at all. 
The theory was that he wished by this means to hide the 


J ESU®S’ estimate of the significance of his teaching 


*The parable was a way of presenting truth in common use 
among Jewish teachers. The word was applied to a broad range 
of illustration; the simple statement, “Physician, heal thyself,” is 
called a parable (Lk, IV:23), and so also is the somewhat extended 
allegory of the farmer who rented his vineyard to unscrupulous and 
murderous tenants (Mk. XII:1-9). 

*IV:1-34, 


187 


188 Tuer Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


truth because God had distinctly planned to exclude that 
generation of Jews, especially its obdurate, scribal and 
priestly leaders, from participation in the Jesus Messianic 
movement. Paul held this view (in opposition to the 
idea, prevalent among many Gentile Christians, that God 
had permanently “cast off” all the Jewish nation) : “That 
which Israel seeketh for, that he obtained not; but the 
election obtained it and the rest were hardened, according 
as it is written, ‘God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes — 
that they should not see and ears that they should not 
hear,’ unto this very day.” “A hardening in part hath 
befallen Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come 
in; and so all Israel shall be saved.””* This idea was 
attributed by the Gospel makers to Jesus: “And when he 
was alone they that were about him with the twelve asked 
of him the parables. (Mt. ‘““‘Why speakest thou unto them 
in parables?” ) And he said unto them, Unto you is given 
the mystery of the Kingdom of God: but unto them that 
are without all things are done in parables: that seeing 
they may see and not perceive; and hearing they may 
hear and not understand; lest haply they should turn 
again, and it should be forgiven them.” * Mark, like Paul, 
does not understand this to be the permanent destiny of 
the Jewish nation; it is only a hiding of the truth from 
one generation preliminary to a more effective proclama- 
tion of it to the whole nation after this guilty generation 
had passed away; God would certainly not conceal truth 
permanently. Mark assembles at this point a number of 
fragmentary utterances of Jesus to show this: “And he 
said unto them, Is the lamp brought to be put under the 
bushel, or under the bed, and not to be put on the stand ? 
For there is nothing hid, save that it should be manifested, 


*Rom. IX-XI; especially XI:1, 8-12, 25-27. 
‘Mk. IV:10-12. 


PaRABLES. OF THE KINGDOM 189 


neither was anything made secret, but that it should come 
to light.” ® , 

These hidden truths were called “mysteries,” a word 
in common use in the religious circles of the Greco- 
Roman world in which the early church lived and a word 
suggestive of the “secrets” that were “revealed” in Jewish 
apocalyptic, or revelation, literature, especially concerned 
with the unseen world and the prospective break up of the 
present age. Every religion would be expected to have 
its “mysteries”; its secret truths revealed to the inner 
circle of initiates. ‘They were not necessarily hard to 
understand, but simply difficult to discover, like the secrets 
of a secret society. 

The idea that God was distinctly purposing to conceal 
the truth from this generation of Jews connected itself 
in the minds of the Gospel makers with the passage in 
Isaiah, just quoted above, that described the desperate 
apostacy of the nation in Isaiah’s day. How much of 
this view was held by Jesus himself? It seems probable 
that he did cite the Isaiah passage in discussing the 
situation in which he found himself. The national lead- 
ers from Jerusalem had just gone to the perilous extreme 
of declaring the Spirit of God which Jesus felt within 
him to be the hot breath of Beelzeboul, and were in danger 
of eternal sin (p. 120). Whatever Jesus said about them 
the early Christian preachers and prophets, who gathered 
and shaped the Gospel material, naturally amplified and 


* Mk. IV:2]-22. 

*Is. VI:9-10. This passage appears in two forms in the Old 
Testament, the stern form of the original Hebrew reproduced in 
Mark, and the milder translation of the Hebrew in the Greek Old 
Testament, reproduced in the Matthew Gospel, which tries to take 
the responsibility for their hardening off from God and lay. it on 
‘the people themselves. Luke, like Mark, uses the severer Hebrew 
form but shrinks from the last clause: “lest they should repent and 
be forgiven.” 


190 Tuer Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


explained in the light of the conflict going on between 
synagogue and church and the general rejection of Chris- 
tianity by the Jewish nation in their day. - 

Parables were well adapted to the tense situation in 
which Jesus found himself, though not necessarily for the 
reason given by the early Christian teachers. They 
enabled him to present truth in a veiled way very provoca- 
tive of thought in the case of those who were eager for 
truth and yet not so exasperating as direct unveiled state- 
ments in the case of hardened opponents of the truth. 
They served to draw about Jesus a susceptible group of 
inquirers very amenable to his desire and left the hard- 
ened scribes to go: their way unable to challenge his 
statements. 

What is there in the three parables presented by Mark 
at this point that indicates Jesus’ estimate of the siguifi- 
cance of his Galilean campaign of preparation for the 
Coming Kingdom? The first parable describes a small 
farmer’s varied experience with the different parts of his 
field:-. Within the extent of one small Galiledn field 
varieties of soil might be found: the hardened footpath 
running between two adjoining fields; the limestone rock 
coming near the surface covered only with a thin coating 
of soil; close by a pocket of soil made very rich by dis- 
integrating limestone with its shells and animal remains,’ 
one such pocket full of thistle seeds, another clean and 
ready for the sower’s seed. ‘Hearken: Behold, the sower 
went forth to sow: and it came to pass, as he sowed, some 
seed fell by the way side, and the birds came and devoured 
it. And other fell on the rocky ground, where it had not 
much earth: and when the sun was risen, it was scorched ; 
and because it had no root, it withered away. And other 
fell among the thorns, and the thorns grew up, and choked 

"Thompson, Parables by the Lake, pp. 16-17. 


PARABLES OF THE Kinapom 191 


it, and it yielded no fruit. And others fell into the good 
ground, and yielded fruit, growing up and increasing; 
and brought forth, thirtyfold, and sixtyfold, and a hun- 
dredfold.” § 

In the explanation of this story, given by Jesus pri- 
vately to his disciples, it appears that he was meaning to 
describe the different kinds of men and women that he 
had found as he presented to them the life that they must 
live in order to be ready for the Coming Kingdom. His 
classification was based on the degree and kind of atten- 
tion that they had given to the truths he had presented to 
them. It was no merely academic classification. ‘The 
activity of these months had enlisted all the power and 
passion of his soul. God, the Coming Kingdom, the Judg- 
ment Day, the unseen Heavenly World, the souls of men, 
his own overpowering sense of leadership that would not 
yet resolve itself into certainty of detail, were vivid real- 
ities. Everything he saw in nature, in business life or 
home life suggested some phase of these great realities 
that were always in his thought. The farmer’s field, for 
whose cultivation he had many times made the implements, 
suggested the four classes of people found in the audiences 
to which he had spoken with passionate eagerness. There 
were those whose souls hardened against what he said 
_ like the hard pathway baked by the sun, beaten by the 
feet of men. ‘These were the scribes and their followers. 
The words of Jesus made no impression upon them. Satan 
was ever at hand, like the hungry sharp-eyed birds in the 
footpath, eager to remove (Mt. ‘‘snatch away’’) every trace 
of truth from their attention. It was the scribes, and not 
Jesus, who were being operated on by Beelzeboul! “And 
these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; 
and when they have heard, straightway cometh Satan, and 

*Mk. IV:3-8. 


192 Tre Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


taketh away the word which hath been sown in them.” 
He had found other men and women giving quick and 
enthusiastic assent to his appeals to conscience. They 
seemed to repent of their sins; they talked with him 
repeatedly on the lake front; they followed him from town 
to town. Yet he learned by inquiry that when they went 
to their homes, found the local scribes against them and 
members of their families bitterly complaining of them for 
close association with the Prophet’s company, they yielded 
and came no more to him. They could not endure the 
sour looks and bitter words of the synagogue leaders. They 
doubted whether the Kingdom was near or whether the 
Prophet’s peculiar ideas about the way to prepare for it 
were better than those of the scribes. ‘And these in like 
manner are they that are sown upon the rocky places, who 
when they have heard the word, straightway receive it 
with joy; and they have no root in themselves, but endure 
for a while; then when tribulation or persecution ariseth 
because of the word straightway they stumble.”® He 
had found others, of stronger nature, of large capacity for 
attention and not easily moved by opposition. But they 
were men engrossed in business, women distracted by 
household anxieties, people of means absorbed in various 
agreeable occupations. They could not give prolonged 
attention to the things Jesus had to say. If they had 
done so these things would have gripped them. If a man 
were to bring his wavering attention repeatedly back to 
the thought of God and eternity for a single hour these 
ideas might grip him forever. “And others are they that 
are sown among the thorns; these are they that have heard 


°*Mk. IV:16-17. The word “persecutions” suggests the later time 
when the synagogue was persecuting the Christians. But the origi- 
nal situation in which leading scribes were ready to execute Jesus 
and in which John the Baptist had been killed, would also have 
yielded serious social persecutions. 


ParaBLes oF THE Kinapom 193 


the word, and the cares of the world, and the deceitfulness 
of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke 
the word, and it becometh unfruitful.” 1° Last of all 
there were those who sturdily, candidly, using their capac- 
ity for attention to the full, gave themselves to the great 
ideas of Jesus. They set themselves to be ready for the 
Kingdom. “Their loins were girded about, and their 
lamps burning, like men looking for their Lord.” They 
stopped caring so much about making money; they began 
to comfort people in trouble; and to look out for the 
interests of others as carefully as for their own. They 
received the word into “an honest and good heart and 
held it fast.” ‘“And that in the good ground, these are 
such as in an honest and good heart, having heard the 
word, hold it fast, and bring forth fruit with patience.” 14 

In all this parable the importance of “hearing” is 
emphasized. Everyone who is eager for truth will get it. 
Truth will be measured out. to him in proportion to the 
measure of his desire to know and do the truth. Therefore 
everyone who finds himself having in any degree the 
willing ear should attend with all his energy to what he 
~ hears. He who refuses to do this will find his capacity 
for seeing truth decreasing, his sense of its reality growing 
dim and finally altogether gone. “If any man hath ears 
to hear, let him hear: And he said unto them, Heed what 
ye hear:1? with what measure ye mete it shall be 
measured unto you; and more shall be given unto you. 
For he that hath, to him shall be given: and he that hath 
not, from him shall be taken away even that which he 
hath. AaaS 


* Mk. IV:18-19. 

“Lk. VITII:15. 

™ Not “Be careful what you hear” but “Heed what you hear, give 
honest attention to what you hear, act in mecordance with it.” 

* Mk, IV :23-25. 


194 Tue Lire AND TEACHING OF JESUS 


_ The second parable in which Jesus expressed his esti- 
mate of what he had been doing in Galilee is the parable 
of the crop proceeding steadily toward harvest without 
further attention from the sower.'* The farmer simply 
scatters his seed on the field, then without further thought 
about it goes his way, sleeps and rises night and day. In 
the meantime the crop proceeds steadily toward the har- 
vest, blade, head, grain in the head “while **> he himself 
is not knowing it,” and suddenly on a given day the farmer 
thrusts in the sickle! “And he said, So is the kingdom of 
God, as if a man should cast seed upon the earth; and 
should sleep and rise night and day, and the seed should 
spring up and grow, while he is not knowing it. The 
earth bears fruit of itself; first a blade, then an ear, then 
full grain inthe ear. But when the fruit is ripe, straight- 
way he puts forth the sickle, because the harvest is come.” 
The illustration expresses the confidence Jesus felt that 
while he was passing from place to place, not waiting to 
watch for the results of his preaching in one town before 
going on to the next, God was preparing men for the 
Judgment Day and the breaking in of the Kingdom. To 
men like Judas and Saddouk (p. 35) or their successors, 
holding secret meetings, conspiring for revolution, the 
work of Jesus must have seemed vague, weak and futile. 
But Jesus felt that God was with him. He was working . 
with the same irresistible force that brought crops to 
harvest. Underneath all of life in Galilee was the will 
of God bearing all things on to the Great Crisis, After 
nineteen hundred years millions of men and women all 
over the earth are eager to learn every detail of what he 
said and did in the little towns of Galilee! 


“Mk. IV :26-29. 
* Not “how” ag in the English translation, but “as” in the tem- 
poral sense,—“As I was coming in, I saw him.” 


PaRABLEs oF THE Kinapom 195 


The third parable 7° is that of the mustard seed, small- 
est of garden seeds but producing in the rich sulphurous 
soil about the Sea of Galilee a vegetable the size of a small 
tree, big enough for birds to build nests in. “And he 
said, How shall we liken the kingdom of God? or in what 
parable shall we set it forth? It is like a grain of mus- 
tard seed, which, when it is sown upon the earth, though 
it be less than all the seeds that are upon the earth, yet 
when it is sown, groweth up, and becometh greater than 
all the herbs, and putteth out great branches; so that the 
birds of the heaven can lodge under the shadow thereof.” 
The point lies in the contrast between the minute begin- 
ning and the great ending. Here again from the stand- 
point of such men as Judas and the revolutionists Jesus’ 
unorganized movement seemed only a futile talking out 
into the empty air, wholly inadequate to the creation of a 
forceful Empire. But Jesus was sure of God in hin, 
sure that he was being impelled by God to proceed in this 
way, and that what seemed so inadequate and insignificant 
would lead to the breaking in of the Kingdom. 

The Matthew Gospel (c. xiii) in its parallel to Mark 
at this point has as usual assembled matter having some 
general logical connection. It presents seven parables 
which have in common only the general fact that they are 
concerned with the Kingdom.** They appeal to different 
classes of people, housewives, merchants, fishermen, 
gardeners. 


* Mk. IV:30-32. 

**Two of them are taken from Mark, the parables of the sower, 
and the mustard seed, and a third, the parable of the tares, is pos- 
sibly based on Mark’s parable of the earth bearing crops of itself 
or if not based on it, seemed to the compiler sufficiently like it to 
warrant omitting the Mark parable from his favorite number seven. 
A fourth parable, the leaven, appears also in Luke, while three 
others, the hid treasure, the costly pearl and the drag net appear 
only in Matthew. 


196 Tuer Lire AND TEACHING OF JESUS 


The parable of the small quantity of yeast hidden away 
in three measures of meal is like the parable of the mus- 
tard seed, which it immediately follows. The contrast is 
between the small beginning and the surprisingly great 
ending. Three measures of meal was a large baking, such 
as a chieftain’s wife might prepare for her husband’s 
distinguished guests.1® The little piece of yeast trans- 
formed the whole. The apparently insignificant preach- 
ing of Jesus and his assistants in the Galilean towns would 
lead to the World Empire of God. The parable of the 
man who sold everything he had in order to buy a field in 
which he knew there was buried treasure, its unknown 
owner probably long ago dead, and the parable of the 
pearl merchant who sold all his stock of pearls in order 
to buy one wondrous pearl, illustrate the wisdom of part- 
ing with everything else if necessary in order to be sure 
of a place in the blessed life of the Coming Kingdom. The © 
parable of the drag net, set all day and dragged to shore 
in the evening, about which the fishermen gathered to 
separate the good fish from the worthless ones, illustrated 
the rapidly approaching Judgment Day when the angels 
would gather about the human group to pick out the bad 
ones for burning. The language used here is the con- 
ventional description of the fate of the wicked, found else- 
where in the literature of the day. 

The parable to which the compiler gives most space, 
even a little more than to that of the sower which he 
took from Mark, is that of the poisonous weeds stealthily 
sown by the vicious enemy in the darkness of the night 
time on a field where good grain had already been sown 
by the owner. As the time for harvesting the crop drew 
near, the poisonous weeds, which until that time had 
looked much like good grain, were discovered. The farm 

*Gen. XVIII:6. 


PARABLES OF THE KiINGpOM 197 


hands wished to root them up at once but the farmer for- 
bade it. He said that they would root up the good grain 
at the same time, if they attempted it. Both were to be 
left growing until the harvest and then, after both had 
been cut down, the separation could be safely made. There 
is a view of the Kingdom underlying this parable which 
will come up for discussion later when we consider how 
and when Jesus expected the Kingdom to come (pp. 243- 
255). It is sufficient now to note in passing the presence 
in the Matthew Gospel of matter not found elsewhere 
indicating in the compiler a peculiar consciousness of the 
presence of bad men in the Christian group. Here in 
this parable they are found among the good. LEarlier in 
the Gospel certain Christian preachers were mentioned, 
scandalously liberal in their attitude toward the law of 
Moses, who might barely get into the future Kingdom, but 
with no hope of being highly esteemed there, while still 
others, notable Christian preachers, successful exorcists 
and healers, would not come into the Kingdom at all 
because they were workers of “lawlessness.” 1® One such 
bold man, who might be expected to force his arrogant way 
into the banqueting hall at the time of the Messianic — 
banquet, would find himself quickly tied hand and foot 
and thrown into the outer darkness.”° 


#V:19, VII:21-23. 
* XXIT:11-13, cf. p. 319. 


CHAPTER XIX 


THE GALILEAN PROPHET AND THE PEOPLE 
| EAT TOGETHER BEFORE THE 
HEAVENLY FATHER 


of the work that had been done by himself and his 

assistants in Galilee. He was known later in Jeru- 
salem as ‘“‘the prophet Jesus from Nazareth in Galilee” 4 
and has passed into history as “the Galilean.” Near the 
close of this immortal work in Galilee a remarkable meet- 
ing was held in a retired spot somewhere near the Sea of 
Galilee at which thousands of people were present.2 The 
occasion was thrust unexpectedly upon Jesus in a way 
that must have made it seem to him to be the result of 
God’s arrangement. When the Twelve returned from their 
campaign in the Galilean villages they were in need of 
rest. The experience had been a difficult one for them. 
They had probably not been accustomed to public speak- 
ing; their attempts at exorcism of demons and healing of 
the diseased, sometimes successful and probably sometimes 
unsuccessful, must have been an exciting activity; the 
opposition of scribes and their sympathizers had: often 
been exasperating or alarming; and through it all, the 
feeling that the Judgment Day was near must have kept 
them constantly under strain. When they came back to 


1Mt. XXT:11. 
7Mk. VI:30-44, 


| be the last chapter we have seen Jesus’ high estimate 


198 


Eatine ToaetHer Berors THE Heaventy Fatuer 199 


Jesus with a detailed report of all their successes and 
failures, when they “told him all things, whatsoever they 
had done and whatsoever they had taught,” he saw their 
need of rest, and said to them: “Come ye yourselves apart 
into a desert (quiet, lonely) place and rest a while.” 
There was no chance for rest where they were, “for there 
were many coming and going and they had no leisure so 
much as to eat.” So “they went away in a boat to a desert 
place apart.” Jesus did not immediately accomplish his 
purpose, however, for the crowds saw him starting out 
with the Twelve, noticed the direction in which the boat 
was headed and, while the boat with its tired occupants 
moved slowly across the lake, hurried on foot along the 
northern shore toward the general region where they saw 
that the boat would land. The crowd constantly grew as 
hundreds were gathered up from the lake towns through 
which they passed. “And the people saw them going and © 
many knew them and they ran together there on foot from - 

all the cities and outwent them.” As Jesus, looking across 
the water, saw these thousands in the distance hurrying 
along the roads, his sympathy was kindled. He said to 
his disciples that they seemed to him like flocks of sheep 
without a shepherd—a pitiable sight in a sheep raising 
country. John the Baptist, to whom many of them had 
looked for guidance, was now in prison or already dead.? 
The scribes, their natural religious leaders, seemed to 
Jesus to be utterly unequal to the great crisis of the “last 
days.” There is some reason to suppose that the great 
spring festival, the Passover at Jerusalem, was near and 
that perhaps many of these people were Passover pilgrims 


* Just before this point in the narrative, Mark inserts the account 
of John the Baptist’s haphazard execution to gratify the spite of 
Herod’s wife and step-daughter who had appealed to his lust and 
pride (VI:14-29). 


200 Tue Lire anp Tracuine or JESUS 


coming down from the north and caught here in the lake 
towns for a few hours on their way to Jerusalem.* Jesus 
knew that the Jerusalem scribes who had recently come 
north, bitterly attacking him and his ideas, could give the 
Passover crowds no spiritual guidance. The priests and 
profiteering bazaar men at the temple would do nothing 
but exploit these plain people.® The people were drifting 
about like flocks of unshepherded sheep in the last days 
before the Judgment! Jesus gave up the rest of the day 
to impassioned teaching, sometimes speaking to the thou- 
sands, sometimes to smaller groups and individuals. “He 
came forth (from the boat) and saw a great multitude, 
and he had compassion on them because they were as 
sheep not having a shepherd and he began to teach them 
much.” He talked to them about the Coming Kingdom, 
and the need of repentance; about the Heavenly Father’s 
will; about forgiveness, trust and peace, about the life of 
brotherhood that men must live together in order to be 
ready for the New Order. As the day was drawing to a 
close he proposed that they should eat together. To eat 
together was to enter into the intimate friendship of table 
companionship. What Jesus now proposed was that they 
should eat together as brothers in the presence of God a 
meal of solemn penitence and reconciliation. He, as their - 
host, had them arrange themselves in orderly ranks be- 
fitting a solemn religious occasion. He prayed in the 
presence of them all and after the stillness of the prayer 
the thousands of the poor and heavily burdened, the 
phophondlese flocks, ate together before God a Re poor 
man’s meal that was prophetic of the Messianic banquet 


*Jn. VI:4 says it was the Passover, and the “green Set men- 
tioned in Mk. VI:39 might indicate springtime. 

Of. Mk. XI:15-18. 

*The women and children by themselves according to Mt, XIV:21, 


Eatine Toaeturer Berore THE Heaventy Fatuer 201 


to which all looked forward in their dreams of the Coming 
Kingdom. It made the Kingdom of Heaven seem at 
hand. , 

The religious significance of this meal was felt by all 
the early Christians. Long afterward, when the Fourth 
Gospel was written, it seemed to the author to have been 
the true paschal feast, presided over by the true Messianic 
leader of the people.? More than this, it seemed to him 
to have been the true institution of the Lord’s Supper 
which historically was connected with the paschal supper, 
for he gives no other account in his Gospel of its institu- 
tion and to his account of this meal he attaches the 
eucharistic discourse of Jesus upon the eating of his body 
and the drinking of his blood.® 

The narrative in its present form emphasizes another 
feature of this occasion which assumed great significance 
in the minds of the Gospel makers. It conveys the im- 
pression that no other food was used on this occasion 
besides the five thin cakes of bread and two dried fishes 
that Jesus’ disciples happened to have with them in the 
boat, and that nevertheless there was far more than enough 
for 5,000 men besides probably as many more women and 
children (Mt.). It is not certain from the narrative that no 
other food was used and many of those present, especially 
if Passover pilgrims, would have had bread and fish in 
their wallets. Still Mk. (not followed by Mt. and Lk.) 
says that Jesus divided the two fishes ‘among them all,” 
and later Mt. and Mk. (not Lk.) report a similar meal 
at which 4,000 (Mt., besides women and children) were 
present, when seven loaves and ‘‘a few little fishes” were 
used and seven hampers full were left over. Furthermore 
both Mk. and Mt. (not Lk.) make Jesus later refer to these 


‘Jn. VI:4, 14-15. » 
*Jn. VI:25-59, especially vs. 52-58. 


902 Tue Lire anp Tracuina or JEsus 


two meals in such a way as to show that no other bread 
was used (fish are not mentioned).® Just how the Gospel 
writers conceived this to have taken place they do not 
make clear. The narrative might indicate that as fast as 

Jesus broke off a piece from a cake of bread another piece 
immediately took its place so that the broken cake was no 
smaller than it had been before. Or that when finally 
the broken piece exhausted its capacity for enlargement 
Jesus took another, and so used all five. In the same 
way, as he pulled a fish apart the part removed was in- 
stantly restored. Or did the increase occur in the baskets 
of the distributing disciples? In that case each of the 
twelve began his distribution with a few fragments of 
the original five loaves and two fishes in his basket and as 
fast as he took pieces out other pieces took their places so 
that his basket never became empty—indeed was full at 
the end. Or did the increase take place in the hands of 
the eaters so that a piece was never entirely eaten up? 

- What is to be said about such an account? Apparently 
one of two things. We may possibly say that certain 
forces were used by Jesus, either consciously or un- 
consciously, the like of which we have never yet experi- 
enced, but may sometime experience. We have no special 
difficulty in accepting Jesus’ so-called miracles of healing 
because we have begun to have at least rudimentary ex- 
perience with psychic force in the healing of disease. But 
we have as yet no evidence of any sort of force that could 
be made available for doing such a thing as Jesus is re- 
ported to have done in the case of these dried fishes. 
Another and more probable theory is that this account 
represents a devout legendary addition to, or exaggeration 
of, what actually took place. Certain unhistorical' stories 
tend always to gather about the name of a great man. No 

°Mk. VIII:19-20, Mt. XVI:9-10. 


Eatine ToaerHer Berors THE HEAVENLY FatueErR 203 


one definitely starts them with intent to deceive. They 
simply spring up in various ways. Someone suggests what 
he thinks must have happened or misunderstands what an- 
other has said. It would be strange if so great a person 
as Jesus, afterwards recognized as Messiah, “Lord of all,” 
should have been a complete exception to this general 
tendency, especially in a credulous age in which the 
marvelous was accepted as a matter of course. The early 
Christian preachers in preaching about this wonderful 
occasion, whose religious significance was so great, might 
easily have thought of it in connection with the case of 
the great prophet Elisha: “And there came a man from 
Baal-shalishah, and brought the man of God bread of the 
first fruits, twenty loaves of barley, and fresh ears of 
grain in his sack. And he said, Give unto the people, 
that they may eat. And his servant said, what, should I 
set this before a hundred men? But he said, Give the 
people, that they may eat; for thus saith Jehovah, They 
shall eat, and shall leave thereof. So he set it before 
them, and they did eat, and left thereof, according to the 
word of Jehovah.” *° It is also probable that inasmuch 
as the Messiah was thought of by many as a second and 
greater Moses," the early preachers would naturally have 
felt that Jesus here in the “desert place” (vs. 31, 32, 35) 
must have been like his great prototype in giving the 
people free bread in a wonderful way as Moses gave them 
manna in “the desert.” Such a comparison between the 
two as distributers of free bread is definitely made in the 
Fourth Gospel.1? The people are made to say “What 
doest thou for a sign?’ “Our fathers ate the manna in the 
wilderness.” They ask for a daily distribution of free 
*II Kings IV:42-44, 


"Deut. XVIII:15, Acts III:21-23. 
™Jn. VI. 


204 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


bread like that of the preceding day: “Sir, evermore give 
us this bread,” that is, “Let the endless era of Messianic 
plenty at once begin.” When the presuppositions of the 
Christian generation in which the Gospels were formed 
are once understood it is seen to be very natural that such 
an interpretative addition should have been made to the 
account of what had really been an occasion of extraor- 
dinary religious significance.*® 

After the people, under the guidance of the Prophet of 
the Coming Kingdom, had finished eating together before 
the Heavenly Father, Jesus is represented by Mark to 
have taken strenuous action. He at once vigorously hur- 
ried (“‘constrained’’) his disciples into the boat before the 
crowd dispersed and told them to go to a place called 
Bethsaida, where he apparently expected to join them, 
coming on foot after he had taken leave of the people. Then 
he spoke some final words of dismissal to the people who 
were to find their way back in the late evening to the places 
from which they had come or were to sleep under the stars, 
which would have been no great hardship, since probably 
many Passover pilgrims did this on all the journey. Jesus 
at some point on his way toward Bethsaida went aside in 
the deepening darkness to some retired spot on a hill top 
.for prayer. ‘And straightway he constrained his disciples 
to enter into the boat and to go before him unto the other 
side to Bethsaida, while he himself sendeth the multitude 
away. And after he had taken leave of them he departed 
into the mountain to pray.” ** No reason for this 
strenuous action is given by Mark. The Fourth Gospel 
says it was because a movement started in the crowd to 


*It is not at all inconceivable that some such rumor should have 
begun on the spot. The case of Elisha would have occurred to many 
of these synagogue Bible students as they noted the fact that so 
many people had eaten together without previous preparation. 

“Mk. VI:45-46. 


Eating ToGeTtHer BrerorE THE HEAVENLY FatHER 205 


force a Messianic réle upon Jesus, to take him back to 
Capernaum and on to Jerusalem as Messianic King. It 
would be to avoid this that he at once got his disciples off 
and slipped away himself. : 

The Messianic surmise would naturally have arisen in 
some minds on such an occasion. The Great Prophet of 
the Coming Kingdom who had healed so many sick and 
exorcised so many demons, who had pictured the Kingdom 
of God so vividly, who had now gathered the great multi- 
tude to eat in solemn consecration before God, might easily 
seem to many to be “‘that prophet,” the Messianic Prophet 
who should succeed Moses. This would have been a 
natural surmise if there had been no actual increase of 
the food supply, only the sharing of such food as many 
had brought with them. There would have been still more 
reason for this surmise if some on the spot had begun to 
wonder how so many could have eaten without special 
preparation for such an occasion and to suggest that this 
was really the beginning of the marvelous plenty of the 
Messianic Age. In any case Jesus’ action kept this sur- 
mise from developing, for Mark later represents none of 
Jesus’ great popular following in the nation to be thinking 
of him as the Messiah. When Jesus asked who men said 
that he was his disciples replied: “John the Baptist; and 
- others Elijah; but others, One of the Prophets.” 1° 

The nature of Jesus’ religious experience during this 
night of prayer is perhaps to be inferred from his later 
conduct, which will soon appear. The needs of the un- 
shepherded sheep which had so profoundly stirred him that 
day must have been uppermost in his mind. More and 
more they must have forced him to inquire of God whether 
the general sense of leadership as God’s Son, the Beloved, 
established in his soul at the time of the baptism and the 

* Mk. VIII:27-28. 


206 Tuer Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


testing, involved the assumption of a Messianic role and 
if so a Messianic réle of what type and with what ex- 
pectations, for, as we have seen, the popular Messianic 
idea was vague and varied (p. 40). 

This inquiry may have been further necessitated by the 
apparently providential way in which the situation had 
been unexpectedly forced upon him. He had crossed the 
lake with the purpose of securing rest for his disciples, 
but instead of being able to carry out this plan, a most — 
exciting critical situation had been thrust upon him. He 
may have been in doubt as to whether this decisive inter- 
ference with his plans came from God or Satan. He 
sought the solution of the doubt through prayer. As we 
shall see in the next chapter, this incident was followed 
by a period in which he withdrew from public teaching 
and visited out-of-the-way places. From this period of 
retirement and reflection he emerged with the full, clear 
conviction that he must assume the Messianic roéle.?® It 
may well be, therefore, that this sacred meal with the 
multitudes was an event of decisive significance in the 
development of Jesus’ Messianic consciousness. 

According to Mark the disciples in the boat, probably 
- rowing leisurely along toward the place to which Jesus 
was to come on foot, found the north or northwest wind 
rising and were able to make little headway against it 
even by hard rowing. If this was near Passover season 
there was moonlight during some of the night. In the 
early morning, between three and six o’clock, Jesus from 
his position on the hill saw them and went out to them, 
according to Mark (followed by Matthew), walking on 
the water.17 When we ask what actually happened here 


* Mk. VIII:27-30. 
* The Matthew Gospel adds a paragraph peculiar to itself and in 
accord with its general tendency to exalt Peter (p. 17). He too 


Eatina TocETHER BEFoRE THE HEAVENLY FatuErR 207 


we can only present the alternatives discussed above (p. 
202). If it be regarded as the product of a devout 
imagination it is probably best accounted for by. suppos- 
ing that just as the story of Moses and the manna influ- 
enced the Gospel account of Jesus, the second Moses, and 
the loaves, so it was felt that. Moses’ power over the sea 
must have had something corresponding to it in Jesus’ 
eareer. If both the increase of the food supply and this 
walking on the water were actual occurrences and not the 
product of the devout imagination of the early preachers, 
it seems strange that the disciples in the boat should have 
been so astounded and frightened. What they had ex- 
perienced on the land a few hours before would have 
prepared them for this wonder on the water. Mark feels 
this incongruity and gives as his explanation the theory 
that “their heart was hardened.” 18 

Fortunately our faith in Jesus as the moral Redeemer 
and immortal spiritual Leader of men does not rest on 
his ability to walk on water or so to increase two dried 
fishes and five bread cakes as to make them into a super- 
abundant meal for thousands. Neither does it require 
the supposition that the many men who were used by God 
in the Gospel-making process were lifted out of the truly 
religious spirit and habits of thought natural to men of 
their day. 

With this solemn meal Jesus’ work in Galilee was prac- 
tically ended. According to Mark Jesus and his disciples 
reached the region near Capernaum after the episode on 
the water and found everywhere in country and city multi- 
tudes of sick awaiting them.’® Then followed the break 


could walk on the water, though not for so long a time as his Lord 
and only in entire dependence on his Lord. 

eV I-62, 

*VI:53-56. 


208 Tur Lire anp TEAcHING oF Jzsus 


with the Jerusalem scribes over the tradition (pp. 121- 
123), especially that which concerned hand washing 
before eating, which logically belongs with the developing 
scribal opposition traced in I1:1-II1:30. If it belongs 
chronologically here in chapter seven it may be an inci- 
dental outgrowth of the religious meal which Jesus had 
allowed thousands to eat without the ceremony of hand- 
washing. Such an omission would be a peculiarly flagrant 
offense in the case of a religious meal. At this point 
Jesus leaves Galilee never to return again for public work. 
At a later time he passed through it secretly, presumably 
traveling by night: they “passed through Galilee; and he 
would not that any man should know it.” 2° 


Mk. IX:30. 


CHAPTER XxX 


MISCELLANEOUS REMINISCENCES OF JESUS 
IN THE REGION NORTH AND EAST 
OF GALILEE 


HE section in Mark’s Gospel following that which 
records the termination of Jesus’ Galilean work is 
made up of miscellaneous matter.1 It shows no 

such continuity as is evident in the preceding section 
which pictured the development in Galilee of scribal 
hostility to, and of popular enthusiasm for, Jesus, 
_ Prophet of the Coming Kingdom, healer and exorcist; nor 
is there any such presentation of Jesus’ teaching as is to 
be found in the section following. Points in Jesus’ itin- 
erary, some of them distant from each other, are men- 
tioned, Tyre, Sidon, Decapolis, Dalmanutha, Bethsaida, 
Cesarea Philippi, without any apparent reason for going 
from one to another. No preaching about the Kingdom 
is mentioned in any of them. The paragraphs in the 
section seem like miscellaneous reminiscences of Jesus, 
preserved in various localities where they were later found 
by the collectors of Gospel material. 

We are left to conjecture Jesus’ reason for leaving 
Galilee. He suddenly went north to the region of ancient 
Tyre, a region which bordered on, and had commercial 
connection with, Galilee? In a village of this Tyrian 

*,VIT:24-VITI ;26. 

* Acts XII:20. 

209 


210 Tus Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


territory he for some reason tried to conceal himself in 
lodgings: “he entered into a house and would have no 
man know it.” * Perhaps it was the home of some Jewish 
friend, for people (certainly Jews) from “about Tyre — 
and Sidon” had been with him on the Capernaum lake 
front.* It is possible that he sought concealment here to 
avoid Herod, who, after killing John the Baptist, had 
begun to notice Jesus.® It is far more probable that the 
opposition of the Galilean scribes, re-enforced from Jeru- 
salem, had become so bitter that he wished by withdrawing 
from Galilee to keep it from developing further at present. 
Furthermore, if after the Great Supper there had really 
been some incipient surmise that he was the Messiah 
(pp. 204-206), he wished by all means to have it at once 
disappear. His own mind may not have yet become 
settled on that point and he wished no impulse in that 
_ direction to come from any other source than the voice of 
God in his own soul. 

The first incident ® in this miscellaneous collection is 
thé very significant exorcism of a demon from a little 
“pagan” girl, accomplished without going into her pagan 
home, which would have been scandalous for a Jew,’ and 
without having her brought into his presence. Soon after 
his arrival in the village it had become known, in spite of 
his precautions, that the famous Galilean Prophet and 
exorcist had come from Galilee. The mother of the little 
girl at once sought him out and appealed for help. She 
is described as a native of Syrian (not African) Pheenicia, 
Greek in her education and general viewpoint, not a 
Jewess either by race or religion. She gained entrance to 


9Mk. VIT:24. 

“Mk. III:8. 

®*Mk. VI:14-16. 

*Mk. VII:24-30. 

* Acts X:25-28, XI:3. 


Jesus Norrn anp East or Gatiter 911 


the house, fell at Jesus’ feet and in her desperate sorrow 
over the condition of her little daughter begged for help. 
Jesus objected to helping her on the ground that God’s 
time for helping foreigners had not yet come. With his 
characteristic predilection for ‘‘parables,” he said the chil- 
dren were now having their meal and that none of their 
food must be thrown to the little dogs who were watching 
them eat: “Let the children first be fed.” The woman’s 
quick wit, sharpened by her intense desire for help, seized 
upon the word “first.”” She said that small morsels some- 
times fell to the little dogs under the table while the | 
children were still eating! The spirit of the woman re- 
vealed by this statement led Jesus to make an exception 
to his general policy. He told her that the evil spirit had 
left her daughter. She hurried home and found the little 
girl thrown on the bed, probably exhausted after a final 
convulsion,® but in her right mind. This is unlike the 
cases recorded earlier in the Gospel in which Jesus worked 
directly by his presence and words on the minds of the 
demoniacs (pp. 87-89). The inference is that God gave 
him inner assurance of the little girl’s cure as he made 
prayerful inquiry about her (pp. 84-86). Jesus seems 
to us to have dealt rather roughly with the woman in 
likening her and her class to little house dogs, even if such 
were often family pets. Perhaps he felt at first that he: 
must not depart from the general policy that God had laid 
down for his work; he had not just now left Galilee in 
order to extend Jewish privileges to Gentiles and so still 
further to increase bitter scribal prejudice against him. . 
He, therefore, dealt brusquely with her. He was evidently 
relieved to receive inner assurance from God that he might 
gratify his instinctive desire to relieve distress by making 
an exception to his general policy. 
* Of. Mk. IX:26, 


912 Tue Lire anp TRAcHING OF JESUS 


The presentation of the matter made by Mark for his 
Gentile Christian clientage in and about Rome is one that 
would appeal to them. They had learned from Paul 
that the Gospel was “to the Jew first and also to the 
Greek.” ® 

The incident is given a different treatment in the 
Matthew Gospel,’ prepared for Jewish Christians who 
were still devoted to the idea of Jewish pre-eminence and 
to the law of Moses which they would have been glad to 
see Christians obey (pp. 13-17). Jesus seems more 
unwilling to act in the case. He refused even to speak to 
her: “he answered her not a word.” His disciples are 
represented as present and urging him to do what she 
asked, but Jesus resisted even them with the definite state- 
ment that he had been sent only to “the lost sheep,” the 
neglected classes, among the Jews. There is no implica- 
tion that Gentile dogs may eat after Jewish children have 
“first” been fed. The children are called the “masters’’ 
of the dogs: it is Jews who will finally dominate the earth. 
Furthermore, the woman for whom Jesus finally con- 
sented to do the great favor is not an unmitigated Gentile. 
Though not a Jewish proselyte, she is by implication a 
Jehovah worshipper. She knows enough about Jewish 
religion to be able to call Jesus by a Messianic title, “Son 
of David,” and it is her “faith,” presumably in Jehovah 
or in Jesus as Jehovah’s Messianic prophet, that furnishes 
Jesus with a sufficient pretext for action. 

Jesus now goes back to the Sea of Galilee, but to its 
eastern shore which was not a part of Galilee. He reaches 
the sea, however, by a very circuitous route. He first 
goes a considerable distance directly away from it, north 
from Tyre to Sidon (unless this be regarded as a textual 


*Rom. 1:16. 
Mt. XV:22-28. 


Jesus NorruH anp East or Garimer 2138 


error for Saidon, that is, Beth-saida) and then southeast 
through the middle of the Ten City District, a region that 
lay mainly to the east and southeast of the Sea of Galilee. 
Nothing is said of what happened in these wide extra- 
Galilean wanderings except in one instance. Somewhere 
in the Decapolis a man was healed who had the two related 
ailments, deafness and defective speech. We might be 
inclined to think of this man as a foreigner like the 
woman of Syrian Phenicia, and to suppose that Mark 
in all this section is representing Jesus as working among 
Gentiles. But on the other hand, if Mark was concerned 
to give the impression that this man was a Gentile we 
should surely expect him to mention the fact as he did in 
the case of the Phenician woman. The whole Decapolis 
district had plenty of Jews in it. 

This cure of deafness and defective speech was accom- 
plished in an unusual way. It was not simply by a word 
or a touch, but by both and by the use of saliva. Further- 
more, the prayer that we have assumed to be silently 
made by Jesus whenever he cured the sick (p. 85) is 
here open and evident. The reason for it may be found 
in Jesus’ desire to develop in the man the “faith” that 
he emphasized as so essential to a cure. The man had 
had no opportunity to see Jesus perform cures and, being 
deaf, had not heard much about them. To create in the 
man a lively sense of expectation Jesus puts his fingers in 
the man’s ears, as if to open them, touches his tongue with 
the saliva that is supposed to have curative value, heaves 
a deep sigh of sympathy, the motion of which the man 
ean see, though he does not hear, and lifts his eyes to 
heaven, as the source from which Jesus’ prayer is bringing 
help. Then the cure followed as usual. The “bond” of 
the man’s tongue was loosed, perhaps the bond by which 
Satan had tied it as he was supposed to have tied down 


914 Tue Lire anp Tracuine or JESUS 


the woman so that she could not straighten up.1! If he 
had always been entirely deaf and unintelligible in speech 
it would seem that he would have had to learn gradually 
to talk, but the description of the case indicates either that 
he had always been able to hear and talk some, or else 
that this was some nervous trouble that had come upon 
him at an age when he had already learned to talk dis- 
tinctly. Jesus took great pains to keep the cure secret. 
He took the man out of the city alone into the country and 
gave strict orders to the man’s friends not to talk about 
it to anyone. Others would of course see that he was 
cured, but they need not know by whom. Mark gives no 
hint of Jesus’ reason for wishing his part in it to be con- 
cealed. Perhaps he wished to have his reputation as a 
healer of disease abate so that he could come back later to 
his teaching with more hope of concentrating attention 
upon his message. He had been embarrassed in Galilee 
by his popularity as a healer. The man’s friends did not 
follow Jesus’ instructions and the event set all the country 
talking. It brought to mind all that they had heard about — 
Jesus’ work as a healer in Galilee, which had at an earlier 
time drawn many of them across the lake to Jesus in 
Galilee.1* The popular verdict was a hearty dissent from — 
that known to have been passed on Jesus’ work by the 
Galilean scribes: “he hath done all things well; he maketh 
even the deaf to hear and the dumb to speak.” 18 This 
language suggests the Messianic picture in Isaiah XX XV: 
5-6 and must have seemed very significant to the preachers 
of the Gospel making period. 

This private interview with the deaf man and his 


“Lk. XIIT:11, 16; Deissmann Light from the Ancient East, p. 
306. : 
42 Mk. III:8. 


Jesus Norru anp East or GALILEE 915 


friends is followed, without any introductory explanation, 
by an account of a, meal at which four thousand men 
(“besides children and women,” Mt.) who have been for 
three days with Jesus are abundantly fed with seven 
bread cakes and a few fishes. This account may have 
been found by the collectors of Gospel material in the 
Decapolis. It is natural to suspect that this is simply 
another account of the meal already described, sufficiently 
different in the details which had been developed by the 
early preachers to make the compilers wrongly consider it 
the description of another occasion. It is sometimes said 
that Mark wishes to show Jesus to be doing here for Gen- 
tiles what he had previously done for Jews. But if this 
were true Mark would certainly have brought the point 
distinctly out. The mere fact that Jesus was at the time 
on the east side of the Sea of Galilee would not have 
made it evident to the Christians about Rome that the 
crowds were necessarily Gentile. The reason given for 
providing food is that after being with Jesus for three 
days they are hungry and far from food. They had evi- 
dently brought with them food enough of their own to last 
a considerable time, which throws some possible light on 
the amount of food available for the use of the people 
when the five thousand were fed after having been to- 
gether for only a few hours. In the present account seven 
hampers ** are mentioned instead of twelve baskets. Per- 
haps the fact that in the Jerusalem church later seven men 
were appointed to take the places of the Twelve in serving 
food at the Christian commons ?* led to the surmise that 
there must have been seven distributors here in place of 
the twelve who appeared in the earlier paragraph. 


%The same word is used to describe the ‘‘basket” in which Paul 
was let down from the wall of Damascus, Acts [X:25, 
* Acts VI:3, 


216 Tue Lire anp TrAcHING OF JESUS 


There comes next in this series of miscellaneous inci- 
dents a short tense interview with Pharisees regarding 
which we should be glad to have more information.’® 
These Pharisees appear at a place called “the parts of — 
Dalmanutha” (“the borders of Magadan,” Mt.), to which 
Jesus and his disciples had come by boat. Since they 
had reached it by boat taken on the eastern, Decapolis 
side of the lake, and since these Pharisees seem to know 
Jesus, it is natural to assume that this otherwise unmen- 
tioned place was on the western shore and that we here 
have Jesus touching Galilean soil again for a few hours. 
It is clear that Jesus was being inspected by these Phari- 
sees and that he was deeply stirred by the interview: he 
is said to have groaned, or sighed deeply in spirit. The 
Pharisees, probably scribes of the Pharisees, had very 
possibly been watching Jesus through spies and when he 
landed at this obscure point they at once “came forth,” 
presumably from Capernaum, and “put him to the test” 
on some point; they came forth “tempting him.” They 
asked him for “a sign from heaven,” apparently to serve 
as corroboration of some innovation in teaching or action. 
What new thing had Jesus said or done that should lead 
the scribes to make this challenge? His last contact with 
them before leaving Galilee had been when he took a public 
stand against their sacred traditional interpretation of 
the law (pp. 121-123). They perhaps feared now that 
he would again try to corrupt the people by renewing his 
public attack on the tradition. It may also be that they 
saw the same danger that we found some reason for sus- 
pecting Jesus to have seen, namely, that the people would 
begin to think him to be some sort of Messiah. If so, 
there was double reason for their challenge. If one so set 
against the sacred tradition should be led by his popularity 

* Mk. VI:11-13. 


Jesus Norrn anp East or Gatien 217 


to nurse a Messianic ambition the result would be calam- 
itous. If he were coming back to Galilee to begin a cam- 
paign along such lines they would meet him at its very 
threshold with a defiant challenge. They would probably 
have accepted as a “sign from heaven” that which the 
rabbis often sought, a voice from heaven, or some startling 
physical phenomenon. Jesus’ startling healings and exor- 
cisms had been interpreted by them as a sign from hell! *” 
If Jesus had really increased the supply of bread and fish 
it would seem that this might have satisfied their desire. 
But they might still have contended that this had not hap- 
pened before their eyes, and not in response to an appeal 
to heaven for endorsement of a definite point of teaching 
or conduct. Whatever their idea of a sign may have been, 
Jesus emphatically refused to give a sign.® His unusual 
agitation—“‘he sighed deeply in his spirit’’—may have 
been due to the fact that, as we have seen, he had once 
been tempted to expect from God some spectacular physical 
endorsement, preservation from harm in a leap from a 
temple pinnacle to the pavement below. There may have 
been some recurrence of this temptation now. Especially 
would this be so if Jesus in these days of wandering in 
the outland had been cousidering whether his profound 
sense of call to leadership must not involve assuming a 


a Mk. TIT :22. 

“In Lk. X1I:29-32, Mt. XVI:4, XII:38-41, Jesus says that his 
preaching of repentance is the only sign they will get. It is a sign 
like that given to the citizens of Nineveh by Jonah’s preaching of 
repentance, but greater, because “something greater than Jonah is 
here.” In accord with the Mt. compiler’s general tendency to find 
detailed fulfilments of prophecy, in one of his two references to 
Jonah he cites Jonah’s being “three days and three nights” in the 
whale’s belly as parallel to the Son of Man’s being “three days and 
three nights in the heart of the earth,” that is, in Hades. Accord- 
ing to the Mt. narrative of the burial and resurrection Jesus was 
only two nights and a part of two days in the grave. 


918 Tur Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


Messianic réle of some sort. It may also be true that 
Jesus was always wishing men to adopt his ideals because 
these ideals seemed to them morally attractive, because 
they seemed to them to be per se right, and not because 
these ideals had behind them some physical force or 
arbitrary authority. X 

In close connection with the account of this interview is 
the record of a conversation between Jesus and his dis- 
ciples in the boat as they were sailing away from the 
Galilean shore.1® In this conversation Jesus showed great 
concern for his disciples. They seemed to him to be in 
serious danger. He solemnly warned them to “beware 
of the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod.” The dis- 
ciples missed the point and thought that Jesus was criticiz- 
ing them for having forgotten, in the excitement of the 
interview with the Pharisees, to lay in a stock of bread 
while they were on the Galilean shore. They understood 
him to be really saying: “You seem to have been afraid 
of the leaven that is used by the Pharisees in Herod’s 
territory!” Jesus indignantly reproached them for 
stupidity. He asked them if they belonged to that hard- 
ened element in the nation whom he had previously de- 
scribed °° as looking at things without seeing them and 
listening without hearing. ‘And they forgot to take 
bread; and they had not in the boat with them more than 
one loaf. And he charged them, saying, Take heed, be- 
ware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of 
Herod.” Then follows a conversation in which Jesus 
draws out from them the statistics regarding the two recent 
occasions when he had made a little bread suffice for 
thousands. If the theory suggested above (p. 215) be 
_ true then this conversation would be regarded as the 


* Mk. VIIT:14-21. 
* Mk. IV:10-12. 


Jesus Nortu ANnp Fast or GALILEE 219 


transformation of a popular homiletical explanation into 
an utterance of Jesus. In any case the important ques- 
tion to be raised here is this: What was there in the 
situation of the twelve at this time that aroused the deep 
concern of Jesus? Leaven, or yeast, spreads—it is some- 
times thought of as “hidden” and spreading without being 
seen—‘“‘leaven which a woman took and hid in three 
measures of meal.’’ What was there about the Pharisees 
and Herod that might spread into the lives of the Twelve 
and in some hidden way contaminate their character ? 
The compiler of the Matthew Gospel was perplexed by 
the reference to Herod, and substituted “Sadducees” for 
“Herod.” 74 He also explains that the contaminating 
influence was something in the “teaching” of the Pharisees 
and Sadducees but he does not explain what particular 
point it was in their teaching that the disciples were in 
danger of adopting. Luke in another connection quotes 
the warning as against “the leaven of the Pharisees” 
which he interprets as “hypocrisy.” 2 He leaves it un- 
certain in what particular the disciples were in danger 
of becoming insincere. This passage in Mark is not the 
first one that has classed the Pharisees and Herod together. 
It has been previously said that “the Pharisees went out 
and straightway with the Herodians took counsel against 
him (Jesus) to destroy him.” 2% They did not at that 
time openly proceed against Jesus. Both parties seem 
to have had in their hearts a spirit of desperate antagonism 
to him that for reasons of expediency they did not express 
in action. Something of this insincerity had perhaps ap- 
peared in the interview with the Pharisees that had just 
taken place on the seashore. ‘They had appeared asking 
"Mt. XVI:6. 


#Lk. XII:1. 
* Mk. III:6. 


220 Tue Lire anp Tracuine or Jzrsus 


for a sign from heaven as if open to conviction. Herod, 
too, is described in Luke’s Gospel as a tricky, insincere 
man. When certain Pharisees tried to drive Jesus out of 
Galilee on the ground that Herod was trying to kill him 
Jesus referred to him as a “fox”: “There came to him 
certain Pharisees saying to him, Get thee out and go 
hence, for Herod would fain kill thee. And he said unto 
them, Go and say unto that fox,” that Jerusalem has a 
monopoly of prophet killing.** In this view of the situa- 
tion we should infer from Jesus’ solemn warning that he 
detected among the Twelve a spirit of growing opposition 
to, or at least discontent with, himself although it was 
kept by ‘them from any open expression. The grounds 
for such discontent are not hard to discover: he had failed 
to carry the religious leaders, scribes of the Pharisees; 
he had failed to organize his popular Galilean following 
in any effective form; he had run away from an incipient 
readiness to see in him a Messianic possibility (p. 204 £) 
and was now wandering about in the outland taking no 
decisive step, apparently afraid to face the Galilean scribes 
again; he had just now sailed away from them after a 
helplessly ineffective interview; there were no signs of. 
the coming of the Kingdom. It i ts not strange that there 
should have been in the inner circle at this time the begin- 
ning of the discontent that finally fully possessed Judas’ 
and carried him over at a critical moment into the camp 
of the Pharisees, and of the priests who in Judea corre- 
sponded politically to the Herodians of Galilee. Jesus 
soon took measures to bring this unsatisfactory situation 
to a head, to bring secret dissatisfaction out into the open 
- where he could deal with it vigorously. 

Before. this action is described one other paragraph 
appears in these miscellaneous reminiscences of Jesus in 

“Lk, XIII:31-32. 


Jesus Norto anp East or Gatiter PARA | 


the northern and eastern outland. It describes the cure 
of a blind man, a cure accomplished with unusual diffi- 
culty, and by stages.*° The gradualness of the cure may 
have corresponded to the gradual development of the man’s 
faith. Here again, as in the case of the deaf man, the 
utmost pains were taken to keep the cure secret. 

® Mk. VIIT:22-26. 


CHAPTER XXI 
THE MESSIANIC SECRET 


' N J HILE Jesus was still in the outland and avoiding 
large cities—“‘in the villages of Philip’s 
Ceesarea”—he asked his disciples what seems 

to have been an unusual question, namely, who people in 
-general were saying that he was.’ It. is not certain that 
all the disciples had been with him during all of this 
period of semi-concealment and comparative inactivity. 
Some of them from time to time may have visited their 
homes in Galilee and therefore been able to bring him a 
report of what had taken place in Galilee during his weeks 
or months of absence. They reported that he was still in 
faver- with the people. The people believed his message 
about the nearness of the Kingdom. They felt that these 
were the “last days” of the present age, when ancient 
prophets would return to their people to prepare them 
for Jehovah’s Great Day of Judgment. They regarded 
Jesus as the re-incarnation of some one of the old prophets. 
Some were saying that he was Jeremiah, others that he 
was Elijah, still others that the spirit of John the Baptist, 
recently executed, had entered his body and was using his 
lips and tongue for the continuation of the proclamation 
that Herod had interrupted. No one thought him to be 
the Messiah. If some had earlier surmised that he might 
turn out to be the Messiah, their surmise had subsided 

Mk. VIII:27-30, Mt. XVI:13-16. 
222 


ee Messranic SECRET 223 


below the Messianic level and he seemed to them only a 
great prophet of the last days: ““And Jesus went forth, 
and his disciples, into the villages of Ceesarea Philippi: 
and on the way he asked his disciples, saying unto them, 
Who do men say that Iam? And they told him, saying, 
John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but others, One of 
the prophets.” 

Then Jesus, probing after any festering insincerity 
that he had recently suspected might be underneath the 
surface (p. 220), asked ‘them the direct question, “Who 
do you say that I am?” One man, Peter, spoke out and 
said, “You are the Christ.” Probably few of the others 
could have said it as heartily, and some could not have 
said it at all. Jesus did not deny what Peter had said but 
told them not to express this opinion to anyone outside the 
inner circle: “‘And he charged them that they should tell 
no man of him.” ? 

At this point a number of important questions arise. 
Did Peter reach this conclusion for the first time now? If 
not, how long had he held it? Which one of the various 
types of current Messianic expectation did Peter have in 
mind when he declared his belief that Jesus was the 
Messiah? Did Jesus really think himself to be the Mes- 
siah and, if so, how long had he thought so; what type of 
- Messiahship had he in mind; and to what extent did he 
foresee the details of his Messianic career? Have the 
Gospel data on these points been shaped by the experi- 


*This is the natural meaning of the words. The compiler of the 
Gospel so understood them, as is evident from his subsequent nar- 
rative which constantly assumes that Jesus and his disciples agree 
in thinking him to be the Messiah (e.g., Mk. X:35-40). If the 
words naturally meant “Jesus rebuked them for saying (that is, 
thinking) such a thing,” the compiler would not have let them 
stand, but would have so altered them as to make them say what 
his narrative shows he felt they must have meant. Cf, Mt. XVI:13- 
20, Lk. IX:18-21. 


924 Tue Lirgz anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


ences and convictions of Christians who lived in the Gospel 
making period? ‘That is, did the preachers and compilers 
of the Gospel present the history at this point as they 
felt, in view of subsequent occurrences, that it must have 
been, or did they simply reproduce unaltered very early 
sources that presented the situation as it really was? The 
answers to some at least of these questions are not un- 
mistakably given in the sources. All that can be done is 
to attempt a reconstruction of the situation that shall 
account as satisfactorily as possible for such data as do 
appear in the Gospels and in the early history of the 
Christian movement. It will always be possible, of course, 
to challenge any such reconstruction at various points. 
The Christ in popular thought was a personality be 
longing to the future, with a future career. Evidently 
nothing that Jesus had yet done seemed certainly Messi- 
anic; the popular verdict that he was Elijah or Jeremiah 
proves this. God was to choose and “anoint” his “Mes- 
siah,” or‘‘Anointed One.” God might choose him from 
among men and thrust him out in some spectacular way 
at the proper time. Or God might choose him from among 
heavenly beings and introduce him among men in any one 
of various forms or even disguises.* Peter was evidently 
convinced that God had chosen Jesus for the Messianic 
career and would make the choice evident in the near 
future, at the time when the Kingdom should come. How 
he thought that God would do this does not appear— 
probably in some sudden spectacular way, perhaps by the 
arrival of an angelic host. It does not seem probable that 
Peter now for the first time reached the conclusion that 
Jesus was the Messiah elect. He would in the nature of 
the case have reached such a conclusion only after a good 
deal of thought, and there was less to encourage such 
* Ascension of Isaigh X-XI. 


THE Mass1anic SrcrET 225 


thought now, than there had been earlier. This rather 
aimless and semi-fugitive wandering in the outland was 
not so well calculated to produce a Messianic surmise as 
the vigorous earlier activity in Galilee had been. The 
question of a possible Messianic career had never been 
openly discussed with Jesus. He was known to have 
peremptorily discouraged the surmise when demoniacs 
had shouted out a eid proclamation of it. Now here in 
the outland in spite of all in the external situation that 
was adverse to a Messianic surmise Peter was still holding 
fast to an earlier opinion. 

The probable working of Jesus’ own mind is of course 
difficult to imagine. We have assumed that at the time 
of his baptism he felt laid upon him as “God’s Son, the 
Beloved” the responsibility of leadership in a movement 
toward and into the Coming Kingdom of God; and that 
in the so-called “temptation” he decided upon certain gen- 
eral principles, acceptable to God, to be followed in the 
discharge of this responsibility; but that in these experi- 
~ ences it was not made clear to him that the acceptance 
of this responsibility involved adopting a ‘Messianic 
career” in any of the various forms in which that career 
was currently conceived, nor even in any new form orig- 

*The Matthew Gospel, which largely ignores chronological move- 
ment and conceives the original situation less vividly than Mark, 
represents the disciples at an earlier time to have called Jesus to 
his face “God’s Son” (XIV:33). It might possibly be contended 
that this meant simply an ethical sonship, but here in the Cesarean 
conversation the Matthew Gospel makes Jesus assume that they 
already have recognized in him the Messianic Son of Man. “Who 
do men say that I the Son of Man am?” (or “that the Son of Man 
is’). The compiler of the Matthew Gospel works inte matter from 
Q an earlier declaration of Messiahship by Jesus than Q as pre- 
served in Lk. originally contained. The later, Fourth Gospel, pro- 
ceeds still further than the Matthew Gospel in this direction and 


represents Peter to have known that Jesus was the Messiah before 
he ever met him (Jn. I:41). 


926 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


inating in his own thought at the time. In the great 
humility of soul that had brought him into the Jordan 
waters with the multitude of John’s penitents he was 
content to leave the Messianic career an open question to 
be answered for him by God in God’s own time. In refus- 
ing at the time of the temptation to go to Jerusalem and 
call upon God for a spectacular Messianic endorsement of 
him at the temple, he laid aside Messianic ambition and 
proposed to wait for light from God—he would not ‘tempt 
the Lord his God.’ He had suppressed the outcry of 
demoniacs when they called him the Messiah; it was a 
recurrence of the temptation with which Satan, their 
master, had met him in the beginning. When John the 
Baptist in prison had sent messengers asking Jesus 
whether he felt himself to be the Messiah, Jesus had given 
an enigmatic reply which probably expressed his own 
uncertainty. He reported to John that he found himself 
able to do wonderful deeds such as were predicted in 
Isaiah’s picture of the New Age, and he was probably 
conscious that they were done through the power of God. 
John must not be “stumbled” by them and attribute them 
to the power of Satan as the scribes had done. But he 
could not say that God meant him to be the Messiah.® 
But now in the vicinity of Caesarea he appears with 
a Messianic conviction and with a readiness to bring the 
question definitely up in the minds of the disciples. He 
has reached the conclusion that such sense of mission as 
God is sustaining within him can express itself in no 
other way than in some form of Messianic career. In no 
other way can the nation be made to understand what God 
would do through him. The concept “prophet,” which 
meant much to the Jewish mind, was of too small dimen- 
sions to suit the growing sense of enlarging mission that 
*Mt. XI:2-6, Lk, VII:18-23. 


Tue Maesstanitc Srecrer ON. 


was more and more filling his soul. He must himself step 
forward to be in the New Age more than the loving son of 
God that he had learned to be in the Nazareth years, and 
more than that into which the Nazareth consciousness 
enlarged at baptism, the specially loved Son of God. 
“The Son of God, the Beloved” must accept a Messianic 
career. 

The kind of prospective Messianic career toward which 
Jesus’ mind turned found room for itself in the title 
“Son of Man.” He began to speak of himself at once as 
“the Son of Man” in the Cesarean conversation.® It was 
a title not unfamiliar to Jewish ears either in this form 
or in the related forms, the Man from Heaven, the Hidden 
Man, the Man from the Sea.’ The career of the Mes- 
sianic “Son of Man” was less definitely conceived than 
that of the “Son of David” (pp. 40-2). There was more - 
room in it for unexpected and original Messianic experi- 
ence. ‘'here is reason for supposing that the Son of Man 
type of Messiahship as it was conceived in Jewish thought 
appealed to Jesus before he felt sure that he must himself 
accept a Messianic career. He had perhaps sometimes 
spoken of the coming of the Son of Man without meaning 
at the time to designate himself by that title. It was an 
attractive conception of Messiahship because, as pre- 
sented in the Book of Enoch, the Son of Man performed no 
military achievements, such as would be expected from 
the Son of David, the old warrior king. Instead he exalted 
righteousness, championed the poor, put down tyrants from 
their thrones, all by the power of God’s Judgment Day 
glory, and thereafter shepherded the people in peaceful 
pursuits. The acceptance of this rdle marked an enlarge 
ment of Jesus’ consciousness. It meant recognition of 


*Mk. VIII:31. 
‘Of. I Cor. XV:47, 4 Esd. XIII. 


228 Tue Lire anp Tracuine or JxEsus 


the fact that he would be the Judge of men, as well as the 
Leader under God of a World empire. 

But at this point difficulty begins. The Son of Man 
from heaven was a being who, after having been long con- 
cealed with God, was to come suddenly with angels to the 
earth on Jehovah’s great Judgment Day. He had no 
career on earth before the Judgment Day. How then 
could Jesus begin now before the Judgment Day to think 
of himself on earth as the Son of Man? Did he suddenly 
begin to remember an earlier life in heaven? If so how 
could his earthly life present the uncertainties and prob- 
lems essential to the development of a real human char- 
acter? If it be assumed that everything in Jesus’ life was 
seen by him against the background of a distinctly remem- 
bered heaven, the logical conclusion would be the unreality 
of his earthly life, a popular heresy among the early 
Christians against which our Gospels were considered to 
be a vigorous protest. And how could the disciples at this 
time understand Jesus to be the Son of Man, since the Son 
of Man had no career on earth before the Judgment Day ? 
It is possible of course to solve this problem by simply 
saying that Jesus never.did call himself the Son of Man. 
It was his disciples who after his death reached the con- 
clusion that he had been the Son of Man. The develop- 
ment of their thought would have proceeded in this way: 
Jesus in his lifetime had finally felt and declared himself 
to be the Messiah. He had, however, died and ascended 
into the heavens without doing what the Messiah was 
expected to do. He would, therefore, come from heaven 
to do it later. The kind of Messiah who comes from 
heaven is the Son of Man. Therefore, contrary to all 
expectation the Son of Man in the person of Jesus had 
appeared on the earth before the Judgment Day. In 
creating the Gospel narrative, therefore, the Gospel mak- 


Tus Merssranic SEcrEtT 929 


ers would naturally refer to Jesus as the Son of Man, and 
would necessarily assume that in declaring himself to be 
the Messiah he had known himself to be the Son of Man. 
Before resorting to this theory an effort ought to be made 
to work out the supposition that Jesus did think himself to | 
be the Son of Man as the Gospels represent. If this 
supposition should be found unworkable the other is avail- 
able as an alternative. 

So far as the disciples are concerned a natural enough 
supposition would be that when they heard him call him- 
self the Son of Man, they conceived the Son of Man to 
have entered the body of Jesus before the Judgment Day, 
just as the spirit of John the Baptist after his death was 
thought by Herod to have entered the body of Jesus. It 
might perhaps seem that the disciples would have felt 
such awe in the supposed presence of the Spirit of the 
Heavenly Son of Man as to make intercourse with Jesus 
constrained and artificial, but those to whom devils and 
angels were a matter of course and a subject of daily 
conversation probably found devils less fearsome and 
angelic beings less awesome than we moderns would sup- 
pose. Even modern Christians find themselves able to 
associate unconstrainedly with persons whose bodies are 
thought to be the “temples” of so august a being as the 
Holy Ghost is theologically considered to be. 

It may be that Jesus himself by a logical process reached 
the conclusion that the Spirit of the Son of Man had 
taken possession of him. We have discovered him feeling 
a profound sense of reverence for the Holy Spirit within 
him, through whose power he found himself able to expel 
demons from men (p. 86). He might in the same way 
have found the most rational interpretation of his own 
high sense of mission and responsibility in connection 
with the Kingdom of God, finally conceived as Messianic, 


230 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


to be the assumption that tlie Spirit of the Son of Man 
was within him. Such an assumption would not have 
involved any personal remembrance of a previous exist- 
ence in heaven. The modern mind does not work easily 
under the presuppositions of the ancient Jewish thought 
world, but we must be ready to let Jesus think as a Jew 
of the first century would be expected to think, using 
the modes of thought and the pre-suppositions character- 
istic of the world in which he lived. To try to make 
him think in the terms and modes of thought natural 
to the twentieth century could result only in making his 
life in his own day an unreal human life, and this would 
be simply to repeat in modern form the great heresy that 
the early ‘church with such difficulty cast off. As will be 
seen later, Jewish presuppositions were merely the inci- 
dents of his religious experience, not its essential features. 

The Matthew Gospel at this point contains a paragraph 
peculiar to itself in which Jesus expresses enthusiastic 
appreciation of Peter for the recognition of his Messi- 
ahship.? Peter’s insight and loyalty, Jesus says, can be 
due to nothing less than the touch of God upon his soul. 
No man, “flesh and blood,” could have given him such 
true vision in these dark days. With a play upon the word 
“Peter” Jesus says that he has found in Peter (Petros) 
solid rock (petra) on which to build his new “congrega- 
tion.” The Greek word “ekklesia,” translated “church,” 
might better be translated “congregation,” meaning the 
nation conceived as a religious body. The Jewish people 
led by God through the Sinaitic wilderness constituted the 
“ekklesia,” “church,” or “congregation,” in the wilder- 
ness.° It is the word found in the Greek translation of the 

*Mt. XVI:17-19. 

* Acts VII:38. The word was later adopted by the Christians as 


the name of their organization. The compiler of Matthew was prob- 
ably conscious of its double meaning here,—“nation” and “church.” 


Tue Messtanic Secret 931 


Old Testament Messianic passage, much used by the early 
Christians, Deut. X VIII: 15 ff., where it describes the as- 
sembly of the nation at the foot of Mt. Sinai promising 
to do the will of God. What Jesus now says is that he 
has discovered a foundation man on whom to build the 
new nation, the true Israel, of which he himself will be 
the Messianic head in the New Age of the Coming King- 
dom: “upon this rock I will build my Israel.” In the © 
development of the American colonies when George Wash- 
ington appeared, there was a foundation on which to 
build the new nation. The words present the concep- 
tion congenial to the section of the church in which the 
Matthew Gospel was compiled, a reformed, Christian 
Jewish nation gathering into itself proselytes from all 
other nations (XXVIII: 19-20) and dominating the 
world. Of this nation Jesus will be the Messianic King 
and Peter his first subordinate official. All of the Twelve 
will hold high offices, acting as chieftains over the twelve 
tribes of the New Israel,?° but Peter will be above the 
others. To him will be given the “keys” of the Kingdom 
as a general symbol of authority,'? and particularly of au- 
thority to admit men into the Kingdom. In the next 
sentence Jesus goes on to emphasize this latter species of 
authority. Peter will be the authoritative religious 
teacher, setting up proper standards of admission, de 
termining how the commandments of the Mosaic law are 
to be applied to Gentile converts who will seek admission 
into the Jewish Messianic world empire. Whenever 
Peter shall make anyone of these commandments “bind,” 
that is, apply to a given situation, his verdict will be 
final; whenever he “looses,” that is, pronounces a com- 
mandment inapplicable, there will be liberty to disregard 


Mt. XIX :28. 
™ Of. Is. XXII:22. 


232 Tur Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


it. The scribes now presume to exercise this function. 
They gather about the gateway into the Kingdom of God, 
keys in hand, and shut it before men.’* But Jesus, the 
Messianic head of the Kingdom, has given this power — 
to his apostle Peter. The authority to “bind” and “loose” 
the commandments of the Mosaic law is later conferred 
by Jesus upon the Twelve in exactly the same language 
used here in conferring it upon Peter.’% Probably 
in the source used by the compiler of the Gospel the sen- 
tence occurred only as a commission to all the apostles.’4 
It was repeated by the compiler in reference to Peter 
alone perhaps because he wished to emphasize for his 
readers the fact that Peter rather than Paul was the true 
authority on this point.1> In any case there was no 
thought of any “successors” of Peter or of any of the other 


aMt. XXIII:13. “Woe unto you scribes and Pharisees, hypo- 
crites, because ye shut the Kingdom of Heaven before men.” The 
verb translated “shut” means to lock with a key, “kleis,” keys, 
“kleio,”’ to shut. 

1%®Mt. XVIII:18. With emphasis upon the power to admit into, 
or exclude from, the “church,” a power logically involved in the 
power to interpret God’s commandments. 

* Perhaps it was a part of Q omitted by Lk. because “binding” 
and “loosing” were terms unfamiliar to Gentile readers. 

‘* The passage seems like a reminiscence of the situation in Syrian 
Antioch, where Peter and Paul had been in sharp conflict over the 
question of how much liberty Christians might exercise in their 
relation to the Mosaic food laws. We know from Gal. II:11-14 
that the feeling was very tense. Paul and Peter contended in an 
open meeting and party lines were sharply drawn between the parti- 
sans of each. It is probable that these parties continued for some 
decades, and with more hard feeling than had originally existed 
among the leaders. The Jewish Christians of this region, among 
whom the Matthew Gospel was very possibly compiled (p. 16), 
would be glad to seize upon any appreciation of Peter expressed by 
Jesus and would have felt justified in so shaping it as to make it 
support their contention that Peter and not Paul was the true 
authority in determining the proper application of the Mosaic law 
to the conduct of Christians. They felt perfectly sure that this 
would have been the verdict of Jesus, 


Tue Messranio Srcrer 233 


apostles. The whole conception embodied in the passage 
rests upon the pre-supposition that the Kingdom of God, 
the New Israel, will soon come in the form of the New 
Age, and in this New Age there will be no death and 
consequently no need of “apostolic successors.”” The God 
of the present age, Satan, is against the Kingdom but 
he and his officials, sitting in the gates of Hades,*® will 
not prevail against it. They will not be able to swallow 
it up in their dark realm of death or oblivion. 

The reason why Jesus wished to conceal from the public 
his new consciousness of being the Messianic Son of Man 
was the fact, soon to be considered, that he had developed 
a conception of the Messianic career very unlike that 
commonly held by the people. He did not wish to be 
thought of as Messiah until his conception of Messiahship 
should be understood. If so popular a prophet had pub- 
licly anounced himself as the Messiah, crowds would have 
flocked to him expecting from him the various things that 
they naturally expected from the Messiah. His inevitable 
failure to meet this expectation would have produced bitter 
disappointment and a feeling of resentment that would 
have shut their minds against his religious teaching. 
Furthermore such a proclamation by such a prophet would 
have created a popular excitement that would have brought 
Roman soldiers at once into action. Their presence would 
have roused the fighting spirit among a people always 
ready for revolt. It was uncompromising disapproval of 
such a program that had kept Jesus out of the Judas 
revolutionary movement. The only possible way for him 
to proceed was to keep his Messianic consciousness the 
secret of the inner circle until God should act in some 
notable way. | 


** Oriental officials held court in the gates of the city; the Turk- 
ish government has been “The Sublime Porte.” 


CHAPTER XXII 


THE PROSPECTIVE SUFFERING OF THE 
SON OF MAN 


HILE the disciples, excited by Peter’s bold dec- 

\ \ laration of belief that Jesus would turn out to 

be God’s Messiah, were some of them wondering 
whether they could agree with him, Jesus introduced a 
new and utterly disconcerting idea. He said that it was 
necessary in the plan of God for him, as Messianic Son 
of Man, to be condemned and executed by the supreme 
court of the nation, an action in which there would be 
agreement on the part of the often discordant elements 
constituting the court, Sadducean high priests, Pharisaic 
scribes and other dignitaries. His execution would be 
followed after three days (on the third day, Mt., Lk.) by 
his resurrection.* 

The idea of a violent Messianic death seems to have 
been unknown in Jewish theology. There were those who 
expected the Messiah to die a natural death after a long 
reign, but none expected him to be killed by enemies, 
much less by enemies among his own people. The fifty- _ 
third chapter of Isaiah which has seemed to Christian 
theology to be filled with the idea of a Messianic death 
seemed to Jewish theologians to teach that for the Mes- 
siah’s sake and in response to his entreaties God for- 
gives Israel. Not the Messiah but Israel, in exile, was 


*Mk. VIIT:31-38. 
234 


SUFFERING OF THE Son or Man 935 


referred to in the eighth verse: “By oppression and 
judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation 
who among them considered that he was cut off out of 
the land of the living for the transgression of my people 
to whom the stroke was due.” ‘The Messiah’s work of re- 
deeming Israel from foreign rule, restoring Israel as the 
people of God, and establishing Isrdel’s dominion over the 
nations is accomplished, according to old Palestinian the- 
ology, without the expiating sufferings and death of the 
Messiah.?:. Justin Martyr in the second century A.D. 
represents a Jew as recognising that the Christ must suf- 
- fer, though not the shameful death of crucifixion, but this 
admission may have been produced by Justin’s promi 
with him or by the influence of Christianity on the 
synagogue. ly | 
Jesus is said to have presented the idea ‘ ‘openly,” “with- 
out reserve,” that is, not in the veiled parable form that 
. he so often used. Peter at once, in private or semi- — 
private conversation remonstrated with him. Peter knew 
the doubtful mood of his fellow disciples. They were not 
all in agreement with his own great conviction. The 
misgivings that Jesus had suspected to be concealed in 
their hearts (p. 220) had perhaps been openly expressed 
by them to Peter. He was certain that the effect of such 
an announcement by Jesus would be disastrous. -Peter’s 
readiness to remonstrate with one whom he recognized as 
the Messiah elect shows that his conception of Messiah- 
ship did not eliminate the possibility of a Messianic blun- 
der. To him the Messiah was a king and he himeelf, 
according to the Matthew Gospel, was prime minister. A 
capable prime minister might be able to set his royal 
master right in an error of judgment. This might be 


* Weber, Die Lehren des Talmud, p. 346. 
* Dialogue with Trypho a Jew, 68, 89, 90. 


236 Tue Lire anp TERACHING oF JESUS 


Peter’s view of the case even if he thought that the 
Spirit of the heavenly Son of Man was in Jesus. To the 
Jewish mind angelic beings, like the Son of Man, were 
amenable to reason. Even a man whose body is the 
“temple” of so august a being as the Holy Spirit of God 
would be subject to advice and remonstrance. Jesus vig- 
orously resented Peter’s interference. He had reached his 
conviction, as we shall soon see, in a way that made it 
seem to him the voice of God in his soul. Peter was think- 
ing as low level men think, and not in the high and wise 
way of God’s eternal counsel. Jesus had evidently reached 
his conclusion after painful inner conflict, in which Satan 
had perhaps seemed to stand in his way as at the be- 
ginning. And now in his usual réle of deceiver, Satan 
is again on the field making subtle use of Peter. “And 
Peter took him and began to rebuke him. But he turning 
about and seeing his disciples rebuked Peter and says, 
Get thee behind me, Satan, for thou thinkest not the 
thoughts of God but the thoughts of men.” 

In order to enter as fully as possible into the situation 
presented here it is necessary to try to discover exactly 
what Jesus said to his disciples and what they understood 
by it. The prediction of death and resurrection is very 
compact and explicit. It is twice repeated later as an 
almost stereotyped formula.* The details specified in the 
last prediction—mocking, spitting on him, scourging— 
sound as if they were inserted in the prediction because 
the narrator knew that as a matter of fact they had been 
features of the trial. When the Gospel makers gave lit- 
erary form to the prediction Jesus was known to have 
made, they naturally made the prediction conform as 
nearly as possible to these actual facts. There is also in- 
dication that in a more significant matter they shaped the 

*Mk. IX:31, X:32-34, 


SUFFERING OF THE SON OF Mix 237 


prediction to the actual occurrence, namely, a personal 
resurrection three days after his execution. If Jesus had 
really predicted his personal resurrection at the end of 
such a literal three-day period, it is hard to see why his 
disciples after his execution were not eagerly expecting 
it instead of refusing to believe it when it was reported 
to them. This suggests that what Jesus really told his 
disciples was that he was to be executed in Jerusalem but 
that soon after his execution he would re-appear in some 
connection with the general resurrection, which in the 
thought of many was connected with the inauguration of 
the New Age, or the Coming Kingdom. Jesus presumably 
talked at some length with his disciples about his death and 
resurrection and in the course of such conversation per- 
haps referred to a passage in the prophecy of Hosea that 
fitted the times in which they were living. It described a 
decadent Israel, like that to be found at this time in the 
religious leadership of the people, such a decadent Israel 
as an Isaiah passage had been earlier used by Jesus to 
describe (p. 189). In this Hosea passage, after a dramatic 
description of national decadence, occurs the prediction 
of a national resurrection, or revival, on the third day, 
evidently not the third of three literal week days, but 
the third day considered as the close of a brief appropriate 
time decided upon by God:® “Come let us return unto 
Jehovah; for he hath torn and he will heal us; he hath 
smitten and he will bind us up. After two days he will 
revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, and we 
shall live before him.” ® On this supposition the reason 

* Jesus elsewhere used the expression in this sense: “Behold I cast 
out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow and the third 
day I am perfected. Nevertheless I must go on my way today 
and tomorrow and the day following,” Lk. XIII:32-33. 


*Hos. VI:1-2. It is evident from I Cor. XV:4, “raised on the 
third day according to the scriptures,” that the early Christians 


238 Tue Lire ann TEACHING OF JESUS 


for the incredulity of the disciples when Jesus’ resur- 
rection was reported to them is clear enough. They had 
not expected anything to happen on the third of three 
twenty-four hour days. If they had thought of a literal 
resurrection they had probably thought of it as to occur 
in some spectacular form just precedent to, or as a part of, 
the glorious general resurrection. The mere report of an 
empty grave, which appears in the oldest source, would 
not have been sufficiently impressive to appeal to the 
apocalyptic expectation. Furthermore, the whole idea of 
the glorious Son of Man experiencing a resurrection from 
the dead was incredible. ‘This accounts for their “ques- 
tioning among themselves what the rising again from the 
dead should mean,” on one occasion when Jesus referred 
to the resurrection of the Son of Man.? There was noth- 
ing particularly mysterious to the Jewish mind either in 
the resurrection of an individual or in the general resur- 
rection. But it seemed inconceivable to them that the 
Son of Man, who belonged in heaven and was expected to 
come to earth from heaven, should ever descend into the 
realm of the dead and come up from that dark abode either 
in an isolated personal resurrection or in the general 
resurrection. 

It may also be that when Jesus began to talk about’his 
prospective death and resurrection in Jerusalem, Péter 
and any other of the ‘['welve who agreed with him in think- 
ing Jesus to be the Messiah, did not understand Jesus to 
mean that he really would be killed. They may have 
thought that this was another “parable,” some obscure 
reference to a withdrawal from public life to be followed 
by a sudden emergence from retirement, at which time 


found evidence in the scriptures for believing that Jesus was raised 
on the third day. 
™Mk. IX:9-10. 


SUFFERING OF THE Son or Man 239 


the general resurrection and inauguration of the Kingdom 
would occur. In that case Peter’s strong desire to stop 
such talk was because he feared that some of the Twelve 
might not realize that it was only a parable. Any such 
who did not believe him to be the Messiah, but only more 
or less of a prophet, would then consider his newly dis- 
closed Messianic consciousness to be a pure illusion that 
utterly discredited him—another indication that his fam- 
ily were right in thinking him to be one who sometimes 
lost his mental balance (p. 119). 

How did Jesus reach the conclusion that a violent death 
was an inevitable feature of the Messianic career of the 
Son of Man? We might be inclined to say that Jesus’ nat- 
ural insight into the situation enabled him to see that the 
enmity of the scribes and priests would inevitably re- 
sult in his execution. But on the other hand he might 
more naturally have reasoned that the all powerful God 
would certainly protect his Christ and defeat every pos- 
sible combination of human enemies. The very idea of a 
Messianic Judgment involved the overthrow of all the 
enemies of God and his Christ. A clue to the working 
of Jesus’ mind is found in his reference to the scriptures: 
“How is it written of the Son of Man that he should 
suffer much and be set at nought?’ ® The idea of suffer- 
ing and being set at nought suggests the fifty-third chap- 
ter of Isaiah. It may be, as is often said, that Jesus 
had combined the picture of the Suffering Servant of 
Jehovah in Isaiah with the Son of Man idea. We may 
infer that Jesus had also studied the twenty-second Psalm, 
a Messianic Psalm which in vs. 27-28 almost uses the 
phrase “Kingdom of God,” and the first half of which 
describes a victim undergoing torture. The first sentence 
of this Psalm is said to have been heard from Jesus’ lips 

®Mk. IX:12, 


240 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


during the crucifixion: “My God, my God, why hast thou 
forsaken me.”’® But what led Jesus to make such an 
unprecedented exegesis of the scriptures? _ It seems prob- 
able that the impetus was found in his own inner experi- 
ence. We have seen that the dominant feature of his 
inner life was conscious contact with the living will of 
God. He felt the will of God rising within him for the 
healing of disease, for the forgiveness of sin, for friendly 
social relations with publicans and sinners. It is to be 
supposed also that he felt the undercurrent of pain that 
runs through the will of God in its close contact with the 
selfishness of man. As the consciousness of God pressed 
upward within his own consciousness he felt as God felt 
about the unreadiness of men for the unselfish life of the 
Kingdom. This was a heavy burden that rested upon 
him as it rested upon God. God wrought in him the deep- 
ening conviction that such unselfish ideals as he presented 
to the nation could be realized only as the Messianic 
Leader entered into the suffering of God. The reaching 
of this conclusion must have been a profound religious 
experience that stirred Jesus to the depths of his great 
nature. In some circles of Jewish thought, contempo- 
rary or nearly contemporary with Jesus, the suffering of 
righteous individuals was believed to bring good to the 
nation. It had introduced the glorious Maccabean age.'° 


°Mk. XV:34. 

*It is said in IV Maccabees (1I:7-12), produced in the Alexan- 
drian ghetto, that the notable martyr death of Eleazar, the old 
scribe, the seven brothers and their mother in the Maccabean period, 
served to purify the country. Their death cleansed the fatherland 
and was a “ransom” (“anti-psuchon”) for the nation’s sin. Through 
the “propitiation” (“hilasterion”) of their death divine providence 
saved the people (XVII:21-22). When Eleazar was being burned 
to death he prayed: “Thou, O God, knowest that though I might 
save myself, I am dying by fiery torments for thy law. Be merci- 
ful unto thy people and let our punishment be a satisfaction in their 


SUFFERING OF THE Son or Man 241 


Jesus too felt that it was not only the suffering of the 
Son of Man but the suffering of many of his followers 
that was required for the inauguration of the Kingdom 
of God. Every follower must shoulder his cross and 
stand in procession behind the Leader in the line of those 
proceeding to the place of execution. This last statement 
was made, according to Mark, not to the inner circle of 
disciples only, but to the people at large. “And he called 
unto him the multitude with his disciples and said, If 
any man would come after me let him deny himself and 
take up his cross and follow me.”+! If Jesus was. in- 
fluenced by the thought of the Suffering Servant of 
Jehovah found in Isaiah, he may have considered the 
Servant to be that element in the nation that brought 
redemption to others by its suffering. In accordance with 
such an idea he would naturally call upon all willing 
ones in the nation to join him, the Leader, in redemptive 
suffering for others, not only for other Jews but for other 
nations, for the Messianic idea in its best Jewish forms 
assigned a place in the Kingdom to aliens (pp. 44 f). 
Jesus’ statement to the multitudes was not a disclosure to 
them of his Messianic consciousness. To them he was the 
great prophet of the last days calling upon the willing 
ones among the people to join him in a death that should 
bring in the Coming Kingdom. Anyone who should shrink 
from sacrificing his present physical life in martyrdom 
for this great cause would lose the blessed life of the 


behalf. Make my blood their purification and take my soul to 
ransom (“anti-psuchon”) their souls” (VI:29). In an _ earlier 
Alexandrian document (II Maccabees, first century B.C. 7?) one of 
the seven martyr brothers is made to say that they are giving body 
and soul for their fathers’ laws, calling on God to show favor to 
the nation soon and to let his wrath, justly fallen on the whole 
of the nation, end in their death (VII:37-38). This great sacrifice 
was followed by the glorious period of Maccabean independence. 
“Mk. VIII:34. 


242 Tus Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


Kingdom in the New Age. This would be an incalcuable 
loss, for what advantage would there be in gaining the 
whole world in the present age and thereby losing a posi- 
tion in the blessed life of the Coming Age. (Is Jesus 
here thinking of the time when he was tempted to do 
this, and did he describe his own: temptation to the 
inner circle during these days?) Whoever among the 
people shall be ashamed (like Peter?) of Jesus’ words 
presenting the prospect of death, and ashamed to follow 
Jesus the prophet to an apparently ignominious but really 
glorious death will find in the Judgment Day that the 

Messianic Son of Man will be ashamed of him.!? If Jesus 
really used the title Son of Man here, he was not under- 
stood by the public to be referring to himself as the Son 
of Man. Only the members of the inner circle under- 
stood that he meant himself, or himself already possessed 
by the Spirit of the Son of Man. 

_ At this point in Mark a new utterance is introduced 
by the words “‘And he said unto them.” It is, therefore, 
uncertain whether this utterance was made to “the multi- 
tude” or to the inner circle alone: “And he said unto 
them, Verily I say unto you, There are some here of 
them that stand by, who shall in nowise taste of death 
until they see the kingdom of God come with power.” ?8 
This utterance raises a new question to be considered in 
the next chapter. 


™ Mk, VIII:35-38. 

Mk. IX:1, “see the Kingdom present,’ or “arrived,” perfect 
participle; Mt. XVI:28, “see the Son of Man coming in his King- 
dom”; Lk. IX:27, “see the Kingdom of God.” 


CHAPTER XXIII 


HOW AND WHEN JESUS EXPECTED THE 
KINGDOM OF GOD TO COME 


HE saying of Jesus quoted at the end of the last 

chapter is the first one found in the oldest Gospel 

which definitely raises the double question, How 
and when did Jesus expect the Kingdom of God to come? 
Did he expect some sudden breaking in of the heavenly 
world at a definite time, “the Son of Man coming in the 
glory of his Father with the holy angels” at the end of 
the present age to call all men before him in Judgment 
and begin a New Age? And if so, how soon did he ex- 
pect this “cataclysm,” or “eschatological” ? event to occur? 
_ These two questions are of minor importance compared 
with the great question, What is the Kingdom of God? 
What is it that is to come? A person who looks forward 
to entering “heaven” at death is not nearly so much con- 
cerned to know the year and day of his death and the 
nature of the experience called “death” as he is to have 
at least some clear general idea of the essential character 
of the life in heaven which he must be prepared to live. 
The essential nature of that Kingdom which Jesus ex- 
pected to come has been seen in the chapters on the 


* Having to do with the “eschata,” or “last things,” that is, things 
at the end of the “present age,” or “world,” but including things 
now going on in the unseen heavenly world, the breaking in of 
whose life into the earth will terminate the “present age.” 


243 


244 Tue Lire anp Tracuine or JEsus 


righteousness of the Kingdom. By far the largest part 
of his teaching is concerned with this subject and not 
with these minor questions. The Kingdom was to be a 
world civilization in which honesty and friendliness in 
personal life and social institutions would be made uni- 
versal and secure, a civilization in which all men as sons 
of God, the Heavenly Father, would work together in 
a powerful, true and faithful brotherhood at all the varied © 
tasks to be set for them by the unfolding will of God. 
Jesus’ clear vision of what ought to be, and sometime 
surely would be, was a general ideal the details of which 
fortunately each generation has been left to work out for 
itself in the terms peculiar to its own period in the evolu- 
tion of human thought and life. It has provided the goal 
toward which each generation of those to whom it has 
come in the course of Christian history has been left to 
press earnestly on in its own best way. The questions 
how and when this goal is to be reached could largely 
be left to answer themselves 1 in the course of developing 
human life. 

Is there any evidence as to the way in which Jesus in 
his own day answered them? There is clear evidence 
as to the way in which Jesus was supposed by the early 
Christians to have answered the question, how the King- 
dom of God would come. They supposed of course that 
their own answer was in accord with the thought of Jesus; 
otherwise they would not have given it. Their own answer 
was twofold. In the first place they expected a sudden 
breaking in of the New Age. This appears in Paul: 
“Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot 
inherit the Kingdom of God, neither doth corruption 
inherit incorruption. Behold I tell you a mystery: we shall 
not all sleep (die), but we shall all be changed, in a 
moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; 


How ann Wuen THE Kinapom Wovutp Comr 245 


for the trumpet shall sound and the dead shall be raised 
incorruptible, and we shall be changed.” ? 

It is clear that the Christians among whom the Synoptic 
Gospels were compiled also looked for a sudden end of 
the present age. In unmistakable terms they attributed 
this view to Jesus. He is represented to have said: “But 
in those days after that tribulation (the destruction of 
Jerusalem), the sun shall be darkened and the moon shall 
not give her light, and the stars shall be falling from 
heaven, and the powers that are in the heavens shall be 
shaken. And then shall they see the Son of Man coming in 
clouds with great power and glory. And then shall he 
send forth the angels, and shall gather together his elect 
from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth 
to the uttermost part of heaven.” ® It was almost in- 
evitable that the early Christians should expect such a 
sudden beginning of the New Age. The present age had 
begun suddenly by the fiat of God, as they read their 
Bibles. God had said, “Let there be light; and there was 
light.” * So also heavenly light breaking instantaneously 
in, “in the twinkling of an eye,” by the fiat of God would 
constitute the beginning of the New Age. How else 
could the New Age begin! The modern idea of transition 
by development was not in the Palestinian Jewish mind, 
however conceivable such an idea might perhaps have been 
in certain spheres of Greek thought. It is sometimes said 
that Jesus held no such view; it was simply attributed 
to him as a matter of course by the early Christians. The 
modern unreadiness to ascribe such a view to Jesus is 
due to the fact that the view is supposed to involve the 
impossible assumption that character can be the product 


7T Cor. XV:50-52. 


*>Mk. XIIT:24-27, Mt. XXIV:29-31, Lk. XXI:25-27. 
*Gen. I:3. 


946 Tue Lire AND TEACHING OF JESUS 


of a fiat instead of a growth. Jesus, it is inferred, must 
have realized this impossibility or else been lacking in 
moral insight. However, the eschatological view is not at 
all inconsistent with the idea of the development of in- 
dividual character. It means simply a sudden change in 
environment and the physical adaptation of personality to 
the new environment. A child may be taken out of the 
slums and established in a refined Christian home within 
half an hour but this “cataclysmic” change in environ- 
ment does not eliminate the need and possibilty of subse- 
quent growth. Even if the eschatological idea should 
involve some sudden change in character, such change need 
not be thought to eliminate development. If there be such 
a thing as instantaneous conversion, a sudden radical 
change in character, it must be followed by a long period 
of development. But did Jesus actually hold the escha- 
tological view? The fact that it was possible for the early 
Christians unhesitatingly to attribute it to him is proof 
that at least he never denied it. If he held another view 
he evidently did not think it worth while to make that 
fact clear. 

But the eschatological view of the manner in which 
the Kingdom would come was not the whole of the early 
Christian thought upon the subject. Although Paul be- 
lieved that flesh and blood could not inherit the King- 
dom of God and that the Kingdom would come in the 
twinkling of an eye at some future time, still the presence 
of the Spirit of God, or the Spirit of Christ, in the Chris- 
tian cult meeting and in the hearts of believers, really 
constituted the beginning of the life of the New Age 
and might’on occasion be called the Kingdom of God: 
“The Kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but 
‘righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” ° 
*Rom. XIV:17. 


How anp WHEN THE Kinepom Wou.tp Comer 247 


A similar idea prevailed in the circles in which the Syn- 
optic Gospels were compiled. In the teachings attributed 
by them to Jesus, besides the considerable number of pas- 
sages that speak of the Kingdom as introduced by a 
future cataclysm, are some others that speak of it as a 
present fact persisting in an uncataclysmic way. In these 
passages it appears that wherever Jesus was experiencing 
within him the mighty power of God, and especially later 
the mighty power of the Spirit of the Heavenly Son of 
Man, commissioned ‘to establish the future cataclysmic 
Kingdom, and gathering disciples about him ready for its 
future life, there he felt that in some sense the King- 
dom had already come in a quiet inconspicuous way. This 
idea is probably not to be found in certain parables often 
cited as instances of it (p. 194) but rather in such a 
passage as that reporting his view of John the Baptist’s 
relation to the Kingdom. He speaks of John, greater 
than any prophet and unsurpassed by any sort of man 
of the past, as nevertheless not in the Kingdom of God: 
“But wherefore went ye out? to see a prophet? Yea, 
I say unto you, and much more than a prophet... . 
Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of 
women there hath not arisen a greater than John the 
Baptist; yet he that is but little in the Kingdom of Heaven 
is greater than he.” ® Jesus cannot have thought of John 
the Baptist as excluded from the future Kingdom in 
which all the righteous dead would participate.’ There- 
_ fore it must have been in some present form of the King- 
dom that John was not found. In this context he is 
represented as not being among the disciples of Jesus. His 
eyes had not been opened. He was simply able to say: 
“Art thou he that cometh (prophet or Christ) or look 


*Mt. XI:9-11, Lk. VII:26-28, 
*Mt. VIII:11. 


248 Tue Lire ann Tracnine or JEsus 


we for another?” ® Or if possibly Jesus’ comment on John 
was made after his death then John had been removed by 
death from the present Kingdom. In another place Jesus 
said to the scribes that his ability to exorcise demons 
by the power of God’s Spirit (‘“finger’ Lk.) was proof 
that the Kingdom of God had come upon them: “If I 
by the Spirit of God am casting out demons, then the 
Kingdom of God has come to you.” ® Driving the demons 
back to the abyss was the first step in the Judgment that 
would end this Satan-controlled age and bring in the King- 
dom in its future cataclysmic form. 

In a passage peculiar to Matthew, Jesus is represented 
as recognizing an uncataclysmic form of the Kingdom in. 
which good and bad live undisturbed together. Finally 
in the future eschatological stage of the Kingdom, the 
wicked will be collected by angels “out of the Kingdom.” 
That is, the place where they had previously been was in 
some sense the Kingdom: “The Son of Man shall send 
forth his angels and they shall gather out of his Kingdom 
all things that cause stumbling and them that do in- 
iquity.” 1° In a passage, found in Luke only, Jesus is 
represented as saying to a group of Pharisees (presumably 
hostile as usual) that the Kingdom of God was “in their 
midst.” They had asked him when the Kingdom of God 
would come, apparently expecting from him some specifica- 
tion of significant preliminary events, “signs of the King- 
dom.” Jesus replied that the coming of the Kingdom 
would not be detected by the careful observation of pre- 
liminary signs, for it was already in their.midst. “And 
being asked by the Pharisees when the Kingdom of God 


*Mt. X1:3, Lk. VIT:20. 

*°Mt. XII:28, Lk. XI:20. 

Mt. XIII:41. Is the Kingdom of the Son of Man here dis- 
tinguished from the future “Kingdom of their Father” (v. 43) in 
which the righteous shine after judgment? Cf. I Cor. XV. 


How anp Wuen tHe Kinapom Wovutp Comer 249 


cometh, he answered them and said, The Kingdom of God 
cometh not with observation; neither shall they say, Lo, 
here! or, There! for lo, the Kingdom of God is in your 
midst.” 14 The presence of Jesus, filled with the inner 
sense of being borne powerfully on by the will of God to 
establish the New Order and surrounded by a group of 
disciples, constituted an uncataclysmic presence of the 
Kingdom of God. Luke in the same context represents 
Jesus as proceeding to speak to his disciples of a future 
time when they will look back, longing in vain for one 
of these days when the Son of Man brought the King- 
dom into their midst, and be obliged to comfort themselves 
with expectation of the future Kingdom to be introduced 
by a Judgment as catastrophic as the flood.'? 

The question, when Jesus expected the Kingdom to 
come, has been partly answered in discussing how he ex- 
pected it to come. He carried the Kingdom with him, 
as a present fact and he also looked forward to a future 
manifestation of the Kingdom, sudden and glorious, at 
“the consummation of the age.” When did he think that 
this future manifestation of the Kingdom would be made? 
It is evident that the first Christians expected it to be 
soon. Paul saw a certain program of preliminary 
events, described by him in two quite different ways,'* 
but this program, according to the very epistles in 
which it is presented, seemed to him one that might be 


“Lk. XVII:3. The Greek might be translated “within you,” but 
in this context that translation is less suitable. The Kingdom of 
God was not within the Pharisees to whom Jesus was talking. 
Furthermore “within you” would mean a state of heart at peace 
with God, and that’ Jesus did not mean simply this by the phrase 
is evident from the fact that he considered John the Baptist, whose 
heart was certainly at peace with God, as outside the Kingdom. 

4 XVII :22-37. 

* Rom. [X-XI, II Thess. IT:1-12. 


250 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


carried out in his own lifetime.’ This same’ sense of the 
immediacy of the coming Kingdom seems to have pre- 
vailed in the circles in which the Synoptic Gospels were 
produced. In their report of the teaching of Jesus about 
the Kingdom the urgent need of immediate action is 
emphasized. Definite indications of time are few. In a 
passage peculiar to Luke Jesus, just before his last ar- 
rival in Jerusalem, is reported to have spoken a parable 
teaching that the great demonstration would not be made 
within the next few days as his disciples had apparently 
supposed it might be: ‘He spake a parable because he 
was nigh to Jerusalem and because they supposed that 
the Kingdom of God was immediately to appear.” ?® In 
an enigmatic utterance, found in the Matthew Gospel 
only, he said to his disciples at the time when the Twelve 
were sent out into Galilee to preach the nearness of the 
Kingdom, that they would be compelled to flee from city 
to city, but that the Son of Man would come before they 
had exhausted all the possible places of refuge: ‘When 
they persecute you in this city, flee into the next; for 
verily I say unto you. Ye shall not have gone.through the 
cities of Israel, till the Son of Man be come.” 7® This 
whole discourse, as was said earlier, is apparently a com- 
posite of teachings, some of them applicable to a situa- 
tion that had not yet arisen. This particular sentence 
seems to indicate a situation existing a little before and 
after the destruction of Jerusalem in the year 70, when 
Christians were being persecuted in Palestine but had not 
been driven from its borders. The Christian preachers 
of that period, the period within which the Matthew Gos- 
pel was compiled, found some utterance among the words 
4 Rom. XIII:11-14, II Thess. 1:5-10. 


® Lk, XIX:11, 
Mt Xh8, 


How anp WHEN THE Kinepom Woutp Comer 251 


of Jesus which they interpreted as applying to their situa- 
tion and perhaps somewhat modified into conformity with 
their eager hope. In connection with the sending out 
of the Twelve Jesus may have said something about the 
nearness of the Messianic demonstration to be made by 
the Son of Man (though not at that time openly designat- 
ing himself by the title) which later took the form in which 
we have it. There are really only two explicit designations 
of time attributed to Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels and 
the extent to which these have been shaped by the presup- 
positions of the early Christians it is impossible to tell. In 
the first, after picturing the destruction of Jerusalem, he 
says that soon after (Mt. “immediately,” Mk. “in those 
days’) the Son of Man will appear coming in clouds with 
great power and glory. He then proceeds to say that the 
present generation will certainly not pass away until all 
these things have happened, although the exact day and 
hour of the great event even he does not know; it is 
God’s secret... “‘Verily I say unto you, This generation- 
shall not pass away, until all these things be accomplished. 
Heaven and earth shall pass away but my words shall not 
pass away. But of that day or that hour knoweth no one, 
not even the angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the 
Father. Take ye heed, watch and pray; for ye know 
not when the time is.” +7 

Another apparently explicit designation of time is the 
one referred to at the end of the last chapter. “And he 
said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There are some of 
them that stand by, who shall in nowise taste of death, till 
they see the Kingdom of God come with power.” How, 


™ Mk. XITII:30-33, Matt. XXIV:34-39, Lk. XXI:31-36. It is some- 
times said that “all these things” which are to happen in this 
generation designates only the destruction of Jerusalem, but against 
this view is the word “immediately” and the phrase “in those days,” 
Mt. XXIV:29, Mk. XIII:24. 


252 Tue Lire anp Tracuina or Jzsus 


ever, the context makes it possible to suppose that the 
compiler saw in these words a reference to something 
else than the coming of the Son of Man at the end of the 
age.. Jesus had been saying that this coming of the King- 
dom at the end of the age could be brought to pass only 
after, and in consequence of, the death of the Son of 
Man and his disciples.12 Now he seems to say that cer- 
tain favored persons, before they take their share in this 
Messianic death which is to bring in the Kingdom, will 
in some special sense see the Kingdom of God present “in 
power,” that is, in its ultimate radiant, eschatological form 
(not in the quiet way in which he was beginning to feel 
that he always carried it with him). That this is what 
the words meant to the compilers of the Gospels is indi- 
cated by what immediately follows. Jesus selects the three 
disciples, Peter, James and John, who in the thought of 
the early preachers would most certainly be the ones to 
experience any such special favor, takes them up into 
a mountain (for a night of prayer, Lk.), and there lets 
them see the heavenly glory of the Son of Man shining 
‘through his flesh and clothes. He is seen to have the Son 
of Man’s power to draw men from the realm of the dead,1® 
for two of the most notable men of the past, Moses and 
Elijah, come from the realm of the dead to meet him. God 
himself is present in the traditional cloud that veils his 
glory and out of the cloud issues direct endorsement of 
the pre-eminence of Jesus. It is essentially a temporary, 
preliminary manifestation of what the early preachers con- 
sidered “the Kingdom of God in power’’: the Son of Man 
present in the glory of his Father, resurrecting the dead 
and in the supreme place under God. “And he said unto 


Mk. VIII:31, 34-35. 
* Enoch LI:1-2. The Son of Man and the Elect One seem to be 
the same. 


How anp WHEN tHE Kinapom Woutp Come 253 


them, Verily I say unto you, There are some of them that 
stand by who shall in nowise taste of death till they see 
the Kingdom of God come with power. And after six 
days Jesus taketh with him Peter and James and John 
and bringeth them up into a high mountain apart by 
themselves (a special favor to “some of them that stand © 
by’) ; and he was transfigured before them and his gar- 
ments became glistening, exceeding white, so as no fuller 
on earth can whiten them. And there appeared unto them 
Elijah with Moses. ... And there came a cloud over- 
shadowing them; and there came a voice out of the cloud, 
This is my beloved Son, hear ye him. And suddenly look- 
ing round about, they saw no one any more, save Jesus 
only with themselves.” 7° 

A summary of the evidence then shows that the chief 
feature of Jesus’ experience was his sense of the presence 
of God within him, producing his clear vision of religious 
and ethical values and making him feel the responsibility 
of unique leadership in establishing these values in the 
life of the nation and the world. The Jewish idea of “the 
Kingdom of God,” a-Jewish world empire, was the mould 
in which this unique experience was naturally cast. The 
idea of a cataclysmic end of the present age was a 
feature of this mould, and this idea Jesus accepted. He 
had, however, such profound present experience of these 
great religious and ethical realities that, as his conscious- 
ness of unique Messianic leadership developed, he finally 


*It is often said that the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost would 
have been identified by the early Christians as the fulfillment of 
the promise in IX:1. But no situation in which the Messiah was 
not visibly present is likely to have seemed to the Christian Mes- 
sianists who constituted the early Palestinian church as “the King- 
dom of God present in power,” especially in a context which speaks 
of the Son of Man coming in the glory of his Father with the holy 
angels. 


254 $Tue Jare ann Tracnine oF JEsts 


felt himself to be carrying the Kingdom with him as an 
unostentatious present fact as well as a future cataclysmic 
expectation. ‘The time of this solemn future event he 
did not find God revealing to him, but it seemed to him 
so near as to call urgently for immediate action on the 
part of his own generation. ‘This view of the situation 
may have occasionally affected the application of his funda- 
mental ethical principles to concrete situations, particu- 
larly in the case of the use of property. His basal re- 
ligious and ‘ethical principles, the Fatherhood of God. and 
the brotherhood of man, are more and more clearly seen 
to be eternally valid, im accord with the central trend of 
the moral evolution of man. We constantly appeal to 
these great principles, perfectly expressed in his own char- 
acter and life, in our effort to secure proper industrial 
relations, thrifty provision for the rainy day and old age, 
the removal of the causes of poverty and disease, the 
mastery of the physical world by scientific discovery and 
invention for the common good, the maintenance of law, 
order, courts, schools and all the other institutions of an 
honést' and friendly world ctvilization. But such applica- 
tions were not made in the teaching of Jesus. If they 
had been his teaching would have seemed unreal and been 
out of vital contact with the situation in which he lived. 
It is hard to see how, under such circumstances, he and 
his progressive movement could have gained an historical 
footing in the life of the race. As the will of God has 
unfolded a thought world has come into being in which 
the idea of development has to a certain extent displaced 
the idea of cataclysm (development may include cata- 
elysm). Modern thinking in all its provision for the 
long future counts on an evolution vitalized by the will of 
God and not upon an end of the age near at hand. If the 
immortal spirit of Jesus is in constant touch with the 


How anp WueEn THe Ktnapom Wovtp Comr 255 


life of each generation, he would certainly wish to see men 
make new applications of his principles, however different 
from his own, in order to be true to the unfolding will 
of God in this new thought world. 


CHAPTER XXIV 


BEGINNING TO WALK ALONE IN THE 
WAY OF PAIN 


scene of his strenuous public life in Galilee, ex- 
pressing conclusions that must have stirred his 

nature to its depths. He had been driven by inner stress 
of spirit to assume the Messianic role of the Son of Man 
with all its vast responsibilities. The religious experi- 
ence through which he passed in reaching this conclusion 
we can only feebly imagine. He had also reached the con- 
clusion that he as Son of Man, together with many of his 
followers, must make a great sacrifice of life in the last 
days before the New Age could come to birth. In all this 
profound experience there must have been a certain ele- 
ment of risk and moral adventure such as is involved in 
all great character making experience.’ It is expressed 
in the sentence “I have a baptism to be baptized with and 
how am I straitened until it be accomplished!” * It ap- 
peared like an advancing wave that would submerge him. 
All the sinews of his moral nature tightened as he strained 
tensely forward to meet it. He tried to carry his dis- 
ciples along with him but found them unready. He had 
to push forward, a lonely leader, into the great experience 
of pain brought by the rising consciousness of God within 
*Of. Heb. V:8, “learned obedience by the things which he suf- 


fered.” 
4Lk. XII:50. 


W: have seen Jesus in the outland, away from the 


256 


ALONE IN THE Way oF Pain 257 


him. In the oldest Gospel the unreadiness of the dis- 
ciples for the profound experience of their Messianic 
leader appears in a section following the account of his 
challenge to them.* The challenge introducing an idea 
so startling threw them into confusion. Even Peter, 
perhaps the most discerning among them, resented it. — 
For a week * there was probably much debate among 

them as to whether they should continue with him or 
abandon him. At the end of the week, when it. seemed 
probable that most of them would go,° Jesus took the three 
most influential men for a night of prayer on the moun- 
tain, feeling sure that God would in some way hold them 
and through them the others. The same sort of prophetic 
assurance that was given him on the way to the home of 
Jairus (p. 135) or, according to the Gospel of John, be- 
fore he reached the home of Lazarus,® was given to him 
here. What was supposed by the early Christians to have 
happened on the mountain has just been discussed. The 
modern mind, earnestly feeling after reality, cannot help 
wondering whether the early preachers were wholly right 
in their report of what happened on the mountain at this. 
critical time. It seems easy to many to say that they 
were right, that two men long dead were visibly present, 
that a heavenly radiance did pour out from the spirit of 
Jesus through flesh and clothing, and that the voice of. 
God did speak words that might have been recorded by a 
dictograph. Especially in these days when strange psychic 
phenomena are the object of serious scientific investiga- 
tion it may seem to many that the literal reality of such 
a narrative need not be questioned. The problem for 


*Mk. VIII:31-IX%:1,-IX:2-50. 

*Mk. IX:2, Mt. XVII:1, Lk. IX:28. 
* Of. Jn. V1:66-71. 

©X1:4-11, 41-42. 


258 Tue Lire anp TErAcuiIne of JESUS 


those who do question it is to discover what gave rise 
to the narrative in its present form, what did actually 
happen that the devout imagination of the early preach- 
ers could naturally reshape into this form. It was an 
experience in which the three disciples slept and woke, 
saw and heard something that suddenly vanished and left 
them as they were before. “Peter and they that were 
with him were heavy with sleep, but when they were fully 
awake, they saw his glory, and the two men that stood 
with him.” * “And suddenly looking round about, they 
saw no one any more, save Jesus only with themselves.” ® 
It is possible that a vision or dream, experienced by one 
(presumably Peter) or more of these three men during a 
night of prayer with Jesus, and reported by them as some- 
thing profoundly influencing the lives of all of them dur- 
ing this critical period, was later naturally transformed | 
by others into a narrative of fact. The popular psychology 
of the period may have assumed a certain sort of objec- 
tive reality back of all impressive visions and dreams. The 
material for such a vision or dream as this was present 
in their minds during this period. There had been much 
talk about Jesus as a possible Elijah (the vision made this 
identification henceforth impossible, for both were pres- 
ent), and about his alleged antagonism to Moses. Jesus 
had perhaps recently told them, not only about his tempta- 
tion, but also about his closely related experience at 
baptism when he had heard a voice from heaven saying 
what is here reported. He had profoundly stirred them 
by talking about his death (which according to Luke, 
Moses and Elijah were discussing with Jesus), about the 
resurrection of the dead and about the Son of Man coming 
in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. All these 


‘Lk. IX:32. 
® Mk. IX:8. 


ALONE IN THE Way or PatIn 259 


elements of a vision or dream were daily in their minds 
and their minds were tense. That God should use a 
vision or dream to influence the minds of men at a time 
when men looked to visions and dreams for guidance 
would not seem strange.® 

On the way down from the mountain top (the next day, 
Lk.) Jesus warned the three men that they must not 
make this proof of his Messiahship public at present. The 
reasons for this have already been suggested (p. 233). 
It seemed to the disciples that since Jesus was now proven 
to be the Son of Man on earth, there was no chance for 
Elijah to precede him, as the scribes expected. On the 
basis of Malachi IV :5-6 Elijah was expected to prepare 
the people for the great day of the Lord by “restoring” all 
things to what was imagined to have been a primitive state 
of ideal order. This restoration would secure ideal fam- 
ily relationships, “turn the hearts of fathers and sons to 
each other,” bring the young men and the old men into 
accord. Jesus explained to them that Elijah had come, 
been roughly handled, and gone. This is said to have been 
predicted in scriptures, though where is not evident. This 
seems an allusion to John the Baptist and the Matthew 
Gospel so explains it.° In connection with this explana- 
tion Jesus according to Mark discussed with them state- 
ments in the scriptures that predicted the suffering of the 
Son of Man.”? 

When they reached the village which they had left the 
day before, they found the nine disciples in the midst of 
a humiliating experience. A Jewish father from some 
neighboring village had brought to them his unfortunate 


*Cf. influential visions at a critical time in the history of the 
early church, e.g., Acts IX:10, X:1-3, 10-16, XVI:9-10, XVIII:9. 

1 Mk. IX:11-13, Mt. XVIT:10-13.. 

= 1X3 12. 


260 Tue Lire ann TEACHING oF JESUS 


son, now almost or quite grown to young manhood, afflicted 
since childhood by a demon which had produced a ter- 
rible combination of ailments. He was epileptic, deaf 
and dumb. This had prevented any sort of intellectual 
development. He was violent and hard to care for. The 
destructive demon had often thrown the boy into the fire 
to burn him up or into the water to drown him. He was 
an only child (Lk.) and the happiness of the home had 
been pitifully blighted through the years by this great 
sorrow and constant anxiety. The father had heard of 
Jesus and his company as famous exorcists and had hoped 
to get help from them. One after another of the nine had 
tried their usual formula of exorcism but without pro- 
ducing any effect. The three leading disciples, who might 
have had better success, were away with Jesus and the - 
rest had so lost confidence in Jesus during this critical 
week that they could not pronounce his name in the ex- 
orcistic formula with any great confidence. Scribes and 
others from Jewish ghettos in the vicinity who had come 
with the father were witnessing the failure and vigorously 
discussing it. Perhaps the scribes were considering the 
justice of the Beelzeboul theory which the Jerusalem 
scribes had published (p. 118). Just at this juncture they 
were surprised to see Jesus and the three disciples some 
distance away coming down a mountain path. They ran 
to him, greeted him, and the father at once explained the 
situation. Jesus broke out in an almost impatient ex- © 
clamation at the lack of what he called “faith” manifest 
in all of them, and, for that matter in the general public 
as well: “O faithless generation! how long shall I be 
with you!” He directed the father to fetch his son who 
had been left behind in helplessness as the rest ran to meet 
Jesus. Apparently the father and son were then taken 
by Jesus a little way off by themselves to secure such 


ALONE IN THE Way oF Pain 261 


privacy as Jesus seemed often to seek in such cases.’? In 
Jesus’ presence the young man went into a violent con- 
vulsion. He fell to the ground foaming at the mouth, 
grinding his teeth, writhing and twisting, a shapeless thing. 
The distressed father explained, in reply to Jesus’ sympa- 
thetic question, that this was what had been happening to 
him for years. He begged for help: “If you can do 
anything for us, take pity on us and help us!” Jesus 
caught up his expression: ‘Why do you say, ‘If you can 
“do anything? It is not a question of my ability but of 
your faith. Everything is possible to one who has faith.” 
The father in desperation cried out: “I do have faith 
and if it is not enough, help me to have more.” Then as 
Jesus saw the crowd running toward them, breaking in 
upon their privacy, he ordered the demon to come out 
of his victim and stay out. The young man was left lying 
on the ground in a deathlike collapse but. Jesus took him 
by the hand, lifted him up and he was found able to stand. 
The incident reveals the unsatisfactory state in which a 
majority of the disciples were at this period and also 
Jesus’ own wonderful conception of “faith.” He and 
the three had come down from the mountain experience 
in the full exhilaration of faith, in an elevation of spirit 
‘that made all lack of faith seem a strange and heinous 
thing. Faith, as Jesus used the word, seems to be the 
reaching out of the soul of a man to work with the un- 
seen energy of God’s mighty will to bring good things to 
pass, such things as the removal of the terrible blight 
from this poor boy’s life and the relief of his parents. 
Jesus’s statement that the man who makes this connection 
with the will of God called “faith” can do all things ** 
assumes that the mighty energy of the unfolding will of 


® Mk. VII:33, VIII:22, 
# Mk, 1X:23, 


262 ie Lirrt anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


God is always operating to enlarge life and open new 
opportunity to men. Jesus was constantly experiencing 
this through the wonderful rising of the will of God 
within him and the perfect adjustment of himself to it 
that made him the immortal, morally redeeming revelation 
of God in the terms, and under the limitations, of a gen- 
uine human life. Jesus’ statement expresses his sublime 
confidence, reinforced by his experience on the mountain, 
that as Son of Man he could introduce an order of things 
in which all men should have the same experience with 
the will of God that he was having. A vision of humanity 
shaped itself in his mind in which no limit could be set 
to the achievements possible to a race of men working to- 
gether, in the invincible good will of faith, with the un- 
seen energy of God. 

Men only dimly conscious of God’s vitalizing presence 
and possessing only fitful and partial good will have been 
borne on to great achievements by the will of God, but 
an immeasurably greater career opens before them when 
faith shall become the fixed habit of humanity. In the 
meantime the individual man, who in his faith reaches 
out to work together with the unseen energy of God in 
good will and to the utmost, does not thereby become able 
instantaneously to do all that Jesus was able to do. Neither 
does he reproduce in its fulness the religious experience 
of Jesus. But he is part of a vast movement in human 
life, which under the leadership of Jesus, will finally is- 
sue in such a humanity as Jesus foresaw, and he himself 
as an immortal will have his place in the final outcome. 
Jesus constantly assumed immortality as an essential ele- 
ment in his vision of the coming Kingdom. | 

When the disciples privately questioned Jesus regarding | 
the reason for their humiliating failure in the use of the 
formula that had usually worked so well, he recognized the 


ALONE IN THE Way or Pain 263 


exceptional difficulty presented by such a combination of 
ailments as characterized this case, and said that it re- 
quired prayer, presumably such special prayer as their 
anemic faith during this period of doubt was unequal to. 
Jesus’ reply indicates that he as usual had prayed when 
this wreck of a boy was brought to him and had found 
instantaneous answer in the rising of the will of God 
within him. 

The enthusiastic report made by the three leaders of 
their experience on the mountain seems to have revived the 
confidence of the rest. They probably adopted various 
explanations of Jesus’ dark words about death, and evi- 
dently went on with their own ideas of what a Messianic 
career ought to be, for they will soon be found busily 
appropriating high offices in the prospective Kingdom. 

Jesus, fully possessed by a faith that had cast his lot 
in with the will and way of God at any cost, had found 
that way to be the painful way of the cross. Neverthe- 
less he went eagerly on in the exhilaration of faith. But 
he henceforth walked alone with God in the way of pain."* 
He had received strength from the experience on the 
mountain, for there he had seen God quicken the flagging 
faith of the three trusted leaders (by whatever means this 
result may have been accomplished). It gave him as- 
surance that God was with him and them and would bring 
the Kingdom to pass. 


“Of, Jn. XVI:32, Ye “shall leave me alone, and yet I am not 
alone, because the Father is with me.” 


CHAPTER XXV 


SECRET JOURNEY THROUGH GALILEE: 
POLITICS AMONG THE TWELVE 


FTER a period of some weeks or months in the 
A outland Jesus returned to Galilee, intending only 

to pass through the province on his way to some 
destination beyond.? Mark’s narrative later on brings him 
to the “borders of Judea and beyond the Jordan,” ? a 
region southeast of Galilee. In passing through Galilee 
his Galilean disciples would have opportunity to visit their 
families and attend to matters of business. Jesus him- 
self kept his presence in the province a secret, either 
travelling by night or, if by day, on country paths away 
from cities and villages. “And they went forth from 
thence and passed through Galilee and he would not that 
any man should know it.” He apparently did not wish 
the serious break with the hostile Galilean scribes, which 
had occurred before he left the province (p. 123), to de- 
velop further at present. Neither did he wish his great 
popularity among the people to issue in any Messianic 
demonstration. He felt certain that he had something 
to do in Jerusalem of which God willed that death should 
be the issue. His disciples, who had found it impossible 
to adjust themselves to this idea, perhaps could not be 
trusted to stay long in a region where an attempt to force 

+ Mk. IX :30-32. 
cn ed ia 
264 


Pouitics AMona THE TWELVE 265 


a popular Messianic réle upon him might again be made 
(p. 205). During these days he again tried to make his 
disciples understand that “death” and “resurrection” after 
a “three days” period were before him, but what. these 
expressions could mean in the exalted career of the “Son 
of Man” they could not see. They were shy about asking 
for an explanation, perhaps because they feared that such 
discussion would lead him into a morbid frame of mind; ® 
perhaps because they feared to arouse a certain en erad 
tion that he had sometimes expressed at their unreadiness 
to catch his meaning.* 

During this secret journey they naturally visited Caper- 
naum, the city in which some of them had homes and 
business.® One incident only in this visit is given. Its 
scene is in a house and not in any public place, for Jesus’ 
presence in the city was not to be known. Its outstanding 
feature is the political ambition of the disciples and their 
consequent failure to sympathize with Jesus’ expectation 
of suffering. During their travel on the country road, 
as they drew near to Capernaum where they were well 
known, he had walked at some distance from them, perhaps 
with his cloak so folded about him as to be unrecognized 
by any who might meet him. As he looked at them in 
the distance he saw from their gestures, and perhaps from 
the occasional sound of their voices, that a heated dis- 
cussion was being carried on. Later when they were 
all gathered in the seclusion of the Capernaum home of 
some one of them (Peter? Mk. 1:29), he asked what 
they had been discussing. No one was willing at first 
to reply, but it finally developed that they had been dis- 
cussing who among them would be greater than the rest 


Of. Mt. XVI:22. 
‘B.g., Mk. VII:18, VIIT:17-21. 
‘Mk. I:16-31. 


266 Tue Lirk anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


when official positions in the Messianic Kingdom should 
be assigned. When Jesus learned this he seated himself, 
according to the custom of a rabbi when giving instruc- 
tion to his disciples, and proceeded to give a “lecture,” 
or “teaching”: ‘and he sat down and called the Twelve 
and says unto them.” ‘The situation and the different 
points of the teaching seem, as is often the case, more 
clearly conceived in Mark than in Matthew and Luke. 
According to Mark there were two groups in the Twelve, 
a smaller group of leaders, each one of whom was inclined 
to claim the primacy for himself, and a larger group made 
up of those who did not expect primacy, but who planned 
to pay especial attention to the probable premier with a 
view to receiving special favor from him later, in the 
day of his power. They were looking forward, like all 
high minded Jews, to the reign of God in a righteous 
world; but they now conceived this future in terms of their 
own personal political power and honor. It would have 
seemed far less desirable to them, in their present frame 
of mind, if they had thought of it as an era of new and 
great opportunity for all men, with no special privileges 
for themselves. Devotion to the common good was not 
their present passion and it did not shape their ideal of 
the Kingdom of Heaven. They. were all expecting such 
a Kingdom as is described in the seventeenth Psalm of 
Solomon, with Jerusalem as its capital, renovated, beau- 
tified, its streets delivered from the obnoxious presence ~ 
of foreign officials and soldiers. Irom Jerusalem as a 
world capital Jesus, the Messiah, with a righteous nation 
at his disposal, would enforce the rule of God in all the 
world. The picture in the Psalms of Solomon has the 
‘Son of David as its central Messianic figure, but in such 
a picture the Son of Man, whom Jesus is now supposed 
°Mk. IX:33-37, Mt. XVITI:1-5, Lk, 1X :46-48. 


Pouitics AMONG THE TWELVE 267 


to be, could easily be substituted for the Son of David, the 
chief difference being that the Son of Man would reign 
over a transformed, glorified earth.’ All this seems fanci- 
ful to us, looking back across the Christian centuries, but 
to these men of Galilee it seemed literal fact; they within 
the next few weeks or months would find themselves con- 
stituting the cabinet of the ruler of the mightiest and 
holiest empire known to man. How this prospect would 
naturally affect the minds of plain Galilean business men 
and workmen can easily be imagined when we remember © 
some modern movements that have suddenly opened the 
prospect of high political office to men unaccustomed to 
public life. If Judas Iscariot had the passion for money 
later attributed to him,® he would naturally have hoped 
for a chance to administer the tribute money and revenues 
that would pour into Jerusalem from all over the world. 
Such aspirations may also have stirred the mind of 
Matthew, the tax collector. 

The smaller group made up of aspirants for the primacy, 
evidently contained at least Peter, James and John. Peter 
had been quick to recognize Jesus’ Messiahship. All three 
had been recently taken by Jesus into the mountain for 
an all night conference, and on another occasion had been 
singled out by special attention.® James and John will 
soon appear trying to secure from Jesus a pledge of the 
two chief offices and exciting the indignation of the rest at 
this effort to outmaneuvre Peter.1° According to the 
Matthew Gospel their mother, who was probably a Caper- 
naum woman, interested herself in the matter.1! All 
the relatives of all the Twelve, so far as they had been 


En. XLV:4-5. 

*Jn. XII:6, XIII:29. 
°Mk. IX:2, V:37. 

* Mk. X:35-37, 41. 
UMt. XX:20. 


268 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


made aware of the Messianic secret, would naturally wish 
to see their family fortunes advanced in the great enter- 
prise. Peter on one occasion appears with a sense of special 
grievance, perhaps because of the attitude of James and 
John to him: ‘Then came Peter and said to him, Lord, 
how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive | 
him? Until seven times?” *? 

According to Mark Jesus deals first of all with this 
smaller group. It is to them that he says: “If any man 
would be first, he shall be last of all and servant of all.” 1% 
Does this describe the punishment of the ambitious man 
or the way to reach the goal of his ambition? The 
Matthew Gospel understands it to mean the latter, for 
it represents Jesus as inculcating the childlike spirit.'* 
If this be true it is the man ambitious simply to con- 
tribute to the general welfare and ready now for the sake 
of the common interest to walk at the tail end of the pro- 
cession. instead of at its head, who will be recognized as 
really great in the New Order. This also is the thought 
of Mk. X:42-45 where the Son of Man himself, who will 
be in the supreme place in the future, is said to be for | 
the present obscuring his glory and expecting the humilia- 
tion of public execution in his devotion to the common 
good. It is an impressive way of saying that real per- 
sonal excellence consists in the desire to contribute to the 
common good, not in the desire to have special privileges. 
The New Age will be one in which realities will be rec- 
ognized. In our modern interpretation of the idea some- 
one who works obscurely in his laboratory, running down 
the cause and cure of a devastating disease, moved by the 
divine desire to eliminate the suffering and enlarge the life 

“Mt, XVIII:21. 

1X 335. 

4 XVIII: 1-4, 


Pouitics AMonG THE TWELVE 269 


of future generations, will be recognized in the Coming 
Age as really great. 

When Jesus had finished his teaching to the small group, 
each one of whom thought himself eligible for chief honor 
and privilege, he gave his attention to the larger group. 
He called a little child of the household, whose guest he 
was, into the midst of the circle, took it in his arms? 
and with this action as his text said that they must not 
be trying to pay court to those who might be expected in 
the future to reward such attention. They should rather 
be ready to receive and entertain those (like this little 
child) from whom no such return could be expected. He, 
the supreme leader in the New Age, identified himself 
completely with the interests of such. If the ambitious 
disciples cared for his favor they must show. attention 
to such. He had found the strong compulsion of the will 
of God within him thrusting him out among the un- 
shepherded sheep, among those who had nothing to give 
back; he felt certain that God felt as he did about the 
disciples’ shameful conduct: “Whosoever shall receive 
one of such little children in my name, receiveth me; 
and whosoever receiveth me receiveth him that sent 
me.”’ 16 

Kither on this occasion or soon after, while Jesus was 
concealed in the house, John reported to him an experi- 
ence that a few of them had had. A benevolent man had 
been distressed by the fact that, since Jesus and his disci- 
ples had left Galilee, the exorcism of demons had ceased. 
He was one of the many who had listened eagerly to 
Jesus and now he had started out to see what he could him- 


* Mt. and Lk. seem to shrink from reporting this detail; so also 
in their parallels to Mk. X:16; and somewhat similarly in the 
parallels to Mk. X:21, “Jesus looked at him and loved him!” 

Mk, TX :37. 


270 Tue Lirz AND TEACHING OF JESUS 


self do for the wretched demoniacs, using the name of 
Jesus in his formula of exorcism. He had evidently been 
successful, at least in some cases. The demons feared the 
famous name of Jesus (p. 88). Such conduct had seemed 
to John and others of the twelve to be improper, and they 
had ordered him to discontinue the practice. John said to 
Jesus, “Teacher, we saw one casting out demons in thy 
name; and we forbade him because he followed not us.” 17 
In their view of the case the man was invading their do- 
main, encroaching upon their prerogative. They enjoyed 
special distinction as a band of exorcists commissioned by 
the great prophet Jesus, and they did not wish to have 
their special distinction cheapened by common use. They 
enjoyed having special privileges and did not wish to see 
them disappear. Who could tell but that this man might 
become another competitive claimant for high offices in 
the new Kingdom! Jesus took a different view of the case. 
He was walking in the way of pain; he foresaw a rapidly 
approaching crisis when he himself would be executed and 
all his adherents be brought thereby into disrepute and 
danger. This man who was not afraid to use the Jesus 
formula now and be pronounced by powerful scribes an 
agent of Satan, this man to whom God was evidently giv- 
ing power as an exorcist, would certainly be found among 
the faithful in time of trial so near at hand. “Forbid 
him not; for there is no man who shall be able to do a 
mighty work in my name and be able quickly (soon) to 
speak evil of me.” In this approaching time of trial if 
anyone does not join the popular outery against the en- 
terprise of the executed Jesus, it will be only because y 
heart he isa friend. “He that is not against us is for us.’ 

The enterprise is God’s own; whoever shall show friendli- 
ness by even so slight an ee as giving a drink of water 

“Mk. TX :38-40. 


Pouitics AMona THE TWELVE 271 


to a thirsty disciple will find God eagerly giving him re- 
ward (v. 41). God will reward and not rebuff this in- 
dependent exorcist. In dark contrast with God’s reward- 
ing any friend of the enterprise, even one so humble as 
to have nothing but a drink of water to contribute, stands 
the action of him who discourages and perhaps excludes 
from the enterprise such humble friends. From Jesus’ 
standpoint the rebuff given by John to this unofiicial, but 
fearlessly friendly, exorcist seemed a heinous wrong. It 
might result in transforming his good will into bitterness 
and turning him back from the Kingdom toward which 
he was so truly pressing forward. A man might welcome 
being sunk, heavily weighted, in the depths of the sea if 
he was thereby prevented from doing this great wrong. 
Jesus was evidently profoundly stirred by the utter 
failure of his leading disciples to catch the real spirit of 
the Coming Kingdom. After all his months of teaching 
regarding the broad brotherly righteousness of the King- 
dom and his recent emphasis on the indispensable spirit 
of self-sacrifice that had already brought him in clear 
visualization to the shame of the cross, they see only 
political offices to be quarreled over! They are so blindly 
enamored of them that they can endanger an eager man’s 
chance for the Kingdom without realizing what they are 
doing. In his indignation Jesus says that if they con- 
tinue in this spirit, they will find themselves in hell 
instead of holding high offices in the Kingdom! In bloody - 
figures of speech he warns them to make any painful 
sacrifice of ambition rather than fail to have the humble 
devotion to the common good requisite for entrance into 
the Kingdom. They should not hesitate to chop off hand 
or foot, or to tear an eye from its socket, if these mem- 
bers would keep them out of the Kingdom. A one-eyed, 
one-handed man, a man limping about in the glory of the 


272 Tus Lirz AND TEACHING OF JESUS 


Kingdom would be infinitely better off than an able bodied 
man in Gehenna fire, where refuse is always burning and 
maggots always stirring in decaying carcasses. “If thine 
eye cause thee to stumble cast it out; it is good for thee 
to enter into the Kingdom of God with one eye, rather 
than having two eyes to be cast into hell; where their worm 
dieth not and the fire is not quenched.” 1® ‘This language, 
already stereotyped in Jewish religious literature before 
Jesus’ day,?® described a situation which now seemed to 
the disciples very near at hand. They could almost feel 
the hot breath of Gehenna fire. 

Jesus then proceeded to apply his warning more 
pointedly to the case of the Twelve. The text, as we 
have it, contains a play on the word fire. There is 
Gehenna fire and also another fire, the fire of such pain- 
ful self-sacrifice as has just been described. The fiery 
pains of self-sacrifice are like the salt that preserves from 
the decay otherwise to be experienced in Gehenna. They 
are saved from fire by fire. “Everyone shall be salted 
with fire.” If the spirit of self-sacrifice, that serves like 
salt to preserve from moral decay, be lost, there will be 
nothing to take its place. It is like salt that has lost its 
saltness.2° They must have this saltlike spirit of self- 
sacrifice in themselves and be kept by it from any further 
disgraceful quarreling over high offices in the Kingdom. 
“Salt is good; but if the salt have lost its saltness, where- 

TX :47-48. 

*Gehenna: Gai Hinnom, valley or gorge of Hinnom “lamenta- 
tion,” a place near Jerusalem, Josh. XV:8, where Ahaz sacrificed 
to heathen gods, II Chron. XXVIII:3, and which was therefore 
afterward defiled as a place of abominations and the scene of 
Jehovah’s judgment. Cf. Jer. VII:31, 33. In Jesus’ day it was a 
common name of the place to which the wicked dead were consigned. 

® Coarse salt, perhaps distilled from Dead Sea water, would be 


full of impurities. A mass of these impurities would remain and 
popularly be called “salt,” after the real salt had disappeared. 


Pourrios AMone THE TWELVE 273 


' with will ye season it? Have salt in yourselves, and be at 
peace with one another.” #4 

The Matthew Gospel contains a peculiar paragraph re- 
lating an incident that apparently belongs to this period.?? 
While Jesus was concealed in the house in Capernaum 
one of the temple tax collectors met Peter on the street 
and asked him whether Jesus paid the temple poll tax.”® 
Peter was sure that he did. When Peter returned to the 
house Jesus, seeming to know what had happened, at 
once asked whether kings collect taxes from their own 
sons. When Peter replied that they do not, Jesus seemed 
to draw the conclusion that neither would God want the 
temple tax to be collected from Jesus and his disciples 
who are thought of as true sons of God, true sons of the 
Kingdom. But, Jesus said, it was better to pay the tax 
rather than have trouble over the matter, and told Peter 
that he would find money enough to pay the tax for both 
of them in the mouth of the first fish that he should catch. 
What Peter understood this language to mean does not 
appear, for nothing further is said. Why should the 
Jewish Christians living in the original environment of 
this Gospel have been interested in this subject? Per- 
haps among them there was a difference of opinion about 
the propriety of continuing to pay the temple tax while 
they were being more or less persecuted by the temple 
authorities. There may have been some effort made to 
continue the collection of this tax after the destruction of 
the temple in the year 70. ‘The temple authorities of 
course did not consider this destruction to be final. They 
expected the building to be rebuilt as it had been after 
previous disasters; and they would naturally have been 

= 1X :50. 


™ XVII:24-27. 
Ex, XXX:13. 


274 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


collecting funds for this purpose. It would have been 
necessary, on account of Roman watchfulness, to do this 
more or less secretly and as an appeal to voluntary patriot- 
ism rather than as the enforcement of a right. It is just 
this sort of appeal that appears when Peter is asked 
whether his teacher is not among those who pay the tax. 
The compiler of the Gospel, while recognizing the force of 
arguments against paying the tax, feels that it would 
nevertheless better be paid. The tax commandment is one 
of the “least commandments” that cannot be neglected 
without running the risk of being “called least in the King- 
dom of Heaven.” 74 


*Mt. V:19. 


CHAPTER XXVI 


IN THE BORDERLAND OF JUDAA AND 
PERAA; JESUS RESUMES PUBLIC 
TEACHING 


tinued public teaching, and in recently passing 

through Galilee he had travelled incognito. But 
now in a region nearer Jerusalem, where the Perean + 
territory bordered on Judea, he began again to speak to 
the people. ‘And he arose from thence, and cometh into 
the borders of Judea and beyond the Jordan; and multi- 
tudes came together unto him again, and, as he was wont, 
he taught them again.” ? | 
' It had been a break with the Pharisean scribes, from 
all over the country,® that ended Jesus’ work in Galilee 
(p. 123), and now it was a collision with them that marked 


J ESUS in the outland had almost entirely discon- 


the resumption of public teaching in this new region.*_ . 


They had tried to enlist the Herod party against him in 
Galilee. Here in Persed he was again in Herod’s terri- 
tory,° and they at once tried to secure from him a public 
utterance that would enrage Herod and his wife. John 
the Baptist had publicly criticized Herod for marrying 
his sister-in-law, and the unscrupulous woman had given 


1Perea, “the Beyond,” beyond Jordan. 

* Mk. X:1. 

*Lk. V:17, Mk. III:22, VII:1. 

*Some manuscripts omit the word Pharisees. 
* Mk. III:6, Jos. Ant. XVII:8:1. 


275 


276 Tue Lire anp Txracurne or Jxzsvs 


herself no rest until she secured John’s execution.* Herod 
had divorced a wife to marry his sister-in-law and she 
had put away her husband in order to marry Herod. 
Jewish law did not give the woman the right to divorce 
her husband, but Roman law did.? Mark, the Roman 
Gospel, seems to have this in mind when it represents 
Jesus as saying that if a woman “herself shall put away 
a husband, and marry another she committeth adultery.” ® 
The Pharisees did not dare definitely to bring up the 
case of Herod, for the more conservative of them doubtless 
disapproved his conduct and all of them his wife’s conduct. 
They were eager, however, without compromising them- 
selves to lead Jesus into a public utterance that would 
get him into trouble with the court party. They seem 
to have felt sure, when they brought the question up, that 
he would strongly oppose divorce.® The position that 
Jesus took in his reply to the Pharisees, though Herod’s 
name was not mentioned, would naturally have irritated 
both Herod and his wife; it would have strengthened 
Herod’s theory that the spirit of John the Baptist had 
entered the body of Jesus and was still to be reckoned 
with.’° He did not, however, proceed against Jesus dur- 
ing these few weeks that Jesus spent in his Perean ter- 
ritory. He was probably shrewd enough to see that the 
scribes would in some way secure Jesus’ execution; they, 
and not he, would then experience the unpopularity oc- 
casioned by the execution of so popular a prophet. 

There was another phase of the divorce question which 
the scribes meant to make embarrassing to Jesus. The 

®Mk. VI:14-29. Other influences were also at work, Jos. 
XVITII:5 :2. 

‘Jos. Ant. XV:7:10. 

®X:12. Some mss. and versions read “leave her husband.” 


° Cf. Mt. V:32. 
* Mk. VI:14. 


Resumss Pusric TEAcHING QT 


scribes held that Jesus was a wicked, dangerous man be- 
cause he took advantage of his great popularity to teach 
disregard of the law of Moses. Jesus had denied that 
he was against the law; he was only against the scribes’ 
interpretation of the law, which interpretation he in turn 
said was vitally antagonistic to the law it purported au- 
thoritatively to explain (p. 122). They expected now to 
draw from Jesus some utterance on the divorce question 
that would prove him to be in disagreement with Moses. 
One of the laws of Moses permitted a man formally to 
divorce his wife, but required him to provide her with a 
document declaring her divorced.*! This divorce law did 
not state the grounds on which the husband might send her 
out of his house, and this uncertainty gave occasion for 
various opinions among the scribes. Some recognized a 
wide range of grounds for divorce; others a very limited 
range. This law of Moses was favorable to the. woman, 
for it forbade a husband to order his wife arbitrarily, by. 
a single word of command, out of his house, a proceed- 
ing that was practically certain in many cases to drive 
her into a life of shame. She must receive from him a 
divorce document which would be positive proof to every- 
one that she was not a temporarily discarded wife, but a 
genuinely divorced woman and therefore eligible for an- 
other marriage. If the divorce document sometimes con- 
tained a statement of her husband’s reasons for. divorcing 
her (as it generally did not),1? these might appear to 
be so unimportant as not to lessen her chance of marry- 
ing again, Even under such protection many divorced 
women were probably driven into professional or semi- 
professional immorality. Jesus’ evident compassion for 
such pitiable cases may have been one influence leading 


™ Deut. XXIV:1. 
* Abrahams, Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels, p. 70, 


278 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


him to take strong ground against the easy divorce that 
broke up homes on slight provocation and tended to result 
in widespread social evil. 

He admitted that he was opposed to this divorce law 
of Moses, but he did not regard this as bringing him into 
collision with Moses, for he argued that Moses himself 
did not really approve of this law. The low moral stand- 
ards of the time, their “hardness of heart,” had made it 
impossible to enforce a higher law and had driven Moses, 
against his desire, to publish this unsatisfactory enact-— 
ment. Moses’ real ideal was expressed in his account of 
the creation where he reported a commandment of God 
which Jesus, laying emphasis on the expression “one flesh,” 
interpreted as really forbidding all divorce. “But Jesus 
said unto them, For your hardness of heart he wrote 
you this commandment. But from the beginning of the 
creation, ‘male and female made he them. For this cause 
shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave 
“to his wife; and they two shall become one flesh’; so 
that they are no more two but one flesh. What there 
fore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” 14 
In Mark’s Gospel no mention is made of adultery as 
constituting ground for divorce.‘* This may be because 
Jesus felt that a penitent adulterer or adulteress should 
be forgiven and taken back by the offended party just as 
any other sort of penitent sinner would be. Or it may be 
that Mark assumed as a matter of course that Jesus re- 
garded adultery as a proper ground of divorce. The 
Matthew Gospel specifies this sin as a Justification for 
divorce.?® 

When the scribes thrust the divorce question upon Jesus, 

Mk. X:5-9. 


44So also Lk. XVI:18. 
® Mt. V:32, XIX:9. 


Resumes Pusnic TEACHING 279 


they seemed to be performing a master stroke of policy. 
They hoped to embarrass him not only by bringing him 
into collision with Herod’s practice and with Moses’ law, 
but by making him criticize the status of many families 
throughout the country. Among his popular following 
there must have been many who adopted the view of di- 
vorce taught by the less strict scribes. Jesus’ statement 
represented such divorced persons as had remarried to 
be living in open adultery, and their children to be il- 
legitimate. The scribes naturally assumed that Jesus’ 
attack upon these: homes would greatly lessen his influ- 
ence. According to a passage peculiar to the Matthew 
Gospel 1® even Jesus’ disciples resented his strictness. 
They said that a man would better not marry if there 
was no chance for divorce: ‘The disciples say unto him, 
If the case (“cause” of divorce?) of the man is so with 
his wife, it is not expedient to marry. »” Jesus replied that 
not all men could safely refrain from marriage. He pro- 
ceeded to mention three classes of men physically in- 
capacitated for.marriage and added a statement, ambigu- 
ous as it stands, which seems to mean that others who 
could safely refrain from marriage might do so. This is 
the position taken by Paul in view of the short time to- 
elapse before the end of the age.*’ Jesus evidently re- 
garded the stability and moral vigor of the home as an 
essential factor in a civilization preparing for the King- 
dom of God. It must not be the unstable institution that 
easy divorce seemed to be making it. In the New Age 
there would be no such eat as marriage and con- 
sequently no divorce question.*® 

Children are naturally thought of in connection with 

* Mt. XIX:10-12. 


EY UOr. Laat 
Mk. XII:25, Mt. XXII:30, Lk. XX:35-36. 


280 Tus Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


the home, and Mark at once adds a paragraph revealing 
Jesus’ feeling about children.1° Among the crowds that 
flocked around him again after his period of retirement 
were many mothers who had brought their children 
(‘“‘babes,” Lk.) to be touched by one whom they reverenced 
as a famous prophet. ‘The popular idea regarding the 
value of the touch has appeared before in Mark’s Gospel.?° 
The fact that Jesus’ touch had cured so many sick, perhaps 
made these mothers feel that it would keep their children 
healthy. The Twelve felt that the reputation of Jesus 
among the men was likely to suffer from the conspicuous 
public handling of babies and talking with their mothers.** 
It seemed utterly out of place for one who was about 
to assume the administration of a great world empire to 
be so engrossed in such interests. In the great political 
events soon to occur nothing of political significance could 
be expected from mothers and babies. No one of the 
Twelve who had recently been quarreling over political 
prospects would have tried to show his fitness for high 
office by such conduct! They tried, therefore, to stop the 
eager approach of the mothers. When Jesus saw what 
they were doing the indignation, which they had learned 
to fear,?? began to rise in him. He told them that it 
would be necessary for them to have the spirit of these 
little children if they hoped to enter the Kingdom. The 
Kingdom belonged to such. Children had the simple, 
spontaneous, uncalculating spirit of the Kingdom. To 
Jesus the essence of life in the Kingdom was simple daily 


Mk. X:13-16. 

» JIT:10, V:28, VI:56. 

™ Of. Jn. IV:27; at the well in Samaria “his disciples marveled 
that he was talking with a woman.” Even the Matthew and Luke 
Gospels seem to shrink from reproducing Mark’s statement that he 
took the children in his arms, — 

Mk. IX:32. 


Resumes Poustrc Tracuine 281. 


good will expressing itself in all the elemental relations 
of ordinary life. 

The disciples received a shock when they discovered how 
highly Jesus esteemed commonplace little children as he 
saw them in the brightness of the coming Kingdom. They 
soon received a much greater shock when they found that 
a wealthy citizen, apparently of irreproachable life and 
high standing in the community, was not an acceptable 
candidate for the Kingdom and that Jesus regarded all 
rich people as being, because of their riches, most unlikely 
to enter the Kingdom. 

The incident is reported with considerable detail.2® As 
they were starting out from their lodgings a well-dressed 
young man, an official (‘‘a ruler,” Lk.), came running up 
to them, with great deference kneeled before Jesus and 
asked him to specify some action that would carry with 
it sufficient credit in righteousness to make his account 
in God’s great ledger surely show a balance in his favor 
in the day when books should be opened and men be let 
into the eternal life of the coming Kingdom.** He re- 
garded Jesus as a great prophet preaching everywhere the 
nearness of the Kingdom and competent to give an expert’s 
opinion on this subject. Jesus at first seemed to doubt 
the sincerity of this extraordinary deference exhibited by . 
one of a class with which he was not popular. He treated 
the man with reserve. He criticized his use of the adjec- 
tive “good,” or ‘beneficent,’ in addressing him.?> That 


% Mk. X:17-31, Mt. XIX :16-30, Lk. XVIIT: 18-30. 

*The Matthew Gospel compiled among Jewish Christians who 
were familiar with rabbinic modes of thought puts the question in 
this form: ‘What good thing shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 

* Cf. Rom. V:7. “Hardly for a righteous man will any one die; 
possibly for his benefactor (“the good man”) some one even dares 
to die.” The word is said not to be used in the Talmud in address- 
ing rabbis. 


289 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


word ought to be reserved for God, the ultimate source of 
all benefactions to men.”® He then reminded him that 
he himself knew well enough what were the command- 
ments that lead into the everlasting life and proceeded 
to refresh his memory by enumerating a list of the ones 
that concern human relations. He assumed that a Jewish 
gentleman would not be an idolater, a Sabbath breaker, 
ora profane man. The list varies in the different Gospels. 
Mark paraphrases the commandment against coveting in 
a way likely to probe more deeply after a rich man’s 
probable sin: “Do not defraud.” The Matthew Gospel 
adds, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,” a com- 
mandment which the compiler regards not as displacing, 
but as carrying with it obligation to keep all the com- 
mandments of the law (p. 328). The man was not re- 
pelled by Jesus’ reserve; he very simply said that he 
had been religiously trained and had always kept these 
commandments. Then, according to Mark, Jesus looked 
at him for a moment, recognized his sincerity and felt his 
heart go strongly out. toward him; “Jesus looked at him 
and loved him.” He even proceeded without further ac- 
quaintance to offer him a place among the inner circle of 
his disciples. The young man was a gentleman, perhaps 
also a scholar, and possessed a personality that in impor- 
tant particulars would have made him a great apostle. 
The only condition was that he should do what the others 
had done, give up all property and business and join 
them in preparing other men for the coming Kingdom. 


*The Matthew Gospel is unwilling to represent Jesus as talking 
in this way. Such language would have been seized upon by its 
hostile Jewish environment and used to the disadvantage of the 
Christian message. Therefore the form of the young man’s question 
is first changed and Jesus’ reply then made to read: “Why askest 
thou me concerning the good.” But this change does not fit the 
following context, “one is the good.” 


Resumes Pusuic Tracuine 283 


Jesus’ requirement further specified that he should give 
the proceeds of the sale of his estate to the poor. That is, 
he must let the needs of others appeal to him as power- 
fully as his own. He must surrender special privileges 
and try to share them with others. In the eternal life 
of the coming Kingdom men in reciprocal friendship 
would bear each other’s burdens. If this man wished to 
be ready for such life he must begin to live it now. But 
these few moments were for him a preliminary Judg- 
ment Day. He saw that he did not care to inherit such 
eternal life. He cared more for his money, for the social 
standing, power and gratification of luxurious tastes that 
his money brought him, than he did for men. He went 
away, slowly, reluctantly and very sad. It is often said 
that Jesus merely wished to test the man and that if he 
had found him perfectly ready to give up his property 
he would have had him keep it. But Jesus did not deal 
with the Twelve in this way (vs. 28-29), and there is no 
reason to suppose that he would have done so with this 
young man. 

As the young man walked away Jes esus took occasion to 
say that the rich would find it very difficult to enter the 
Kingdom of God. This statement amazed his disciples.?" 
It seemed to them that respectable rich people might be 
the first of all to enter. Their surprise shows that Jesus 
had not previously been preaching the renunciation of 
property as essential to readiness for the Kingdom to any 
others than the Twelve. Jesus repeated his statement in 
astronger form. Using the camel as the proverbial sym- 
bol of bigness (“strain out a gnat and swallow a camel”), 


* Some texts read “those that trust in riches.” But there would 
have been nothing in such a statement to amaze the disciples. It 
was a very commonplace, unquestioned idea that those who trusted 
in riches had no standing with God. 


284 Tue Lire anp Tracuine or J ESUS 


he said it would be easier for a camel to go through the 
eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom 
of God.?® This seemed to the disciples an utterly un- 
practical view. Jesus was setting up impossible stand- 
ards. They said with some impatience, “Who then can be 
saved?” (“‘Saved,” that is, have eternal life in the Coming 
Kingdom.) Jesus qualified his statement to the extent of 
admitting that God could perform the miracle. | 
What is there about the possession of property that made 
it seem to Jesus so difficult for the rich to live the life of 
the Kingdom of God? The man or woman with plenty 
of money has opportunity and strong temptation to gratify, 
and so to strengthen, a wide range of refined or unrefined 
selfish desires. What he wants he can take. This unfits 
him for the unselfish life of the Kingdom. Friendship 
is the great fact in the life of the Kingdom. But it is 
very difficult for a rich man to have, or to be, a true 
friend. Under ordinary circumstances he has no keen 
sense of needing other men. It gratifies his pride to have 
about him many ostensible admirers and many subordi- 
nates ready to do what he wants done; but he has little 
sense of that real dependence which gives rise to the genu- 
ine gratitude that is an essential element of genuine 
friendship. He cannot help having a strong sense of 
power to inflict social or financial “punishment” on those 
who oppose him. The temptation to use this power in 
unwarrantable ways is not easily resisted and yielding . 
is ruinous to character. It is difficult for him to be a real 
friend to the multitudes of ordinary people, because his 
habits of life and scale of expenditures are so different 


* Tt is sometimes said that there was a little gate near a big city 
gate called “The Needle’s Eye” through which a camel might squeeze. 
There seems to be no adequate evidence for such a statement. And 
furthermore Jesus’ point is that the thing he speaks of is actually 
“impossible with men” (v. 27). 


Resumes Pusrio TEacuine 285 


from theirs that he cannot meet them on the level where 
there is normal reciprocal give and take intercourse. He 
hands “help” down to them with more or less conscious 
or unconscious patronizing. Furthermore, sincerity is the 
soul of friendship and, therefore, of the life of the King- 
dom, as Jesus conceived it. But the rich man’s social 
relationships are apt to be artificial and insincere. Hardly 
anyone tells him with wholesome frequency just what he 
thinks of him! Poor people practically feel a sense of 
disadvantage in his presence which makes them dislike to 
be with him, although they attempt to conceal the fact; or 
else they are always secretly wondering what they can 
get out of him for themselves or for some cause that they 
represent. They do not sincerely want him nor he them. 
When the rich associate with the rich there is apt to be 
a process of more or less subtle comparison and competi- 
tion going on which is ruinous to the simple, sincere friend- 
ships that Jesus supremely valued. In addition to all 
this, the accumulation and care of riches take so much 
of a man’s time that he has little leisure for the develop- 
ment of friendship. Friendship takes time. All this 
and more Jesus must have seen as he studied life, and 
consequently he dreaded riches both for himself and his 
disciples. At the same time it is to be recognized that the 
atmosphere of the Gospels is charged with expectation 
of the speedy end of the age. ‘There was no thought of 
the modern situation in which vast industrial, political, 
philanthropic and educational enterprises would be de- 
veloped more and more insistently calling for, and secur- 
ing, democratic, friendly co-operation of rich and poor, 
enterprises in which wealth, skill, learning, the col- 
lective intelligence and faithfulness of masses of men face 
each other with little uncomfortable sense of superiority 
or inferiority at any point. 


286 Tue Lire anp Tractina or JEsus 


Jesus’ repulse of so fine a man perhaps threatened a 
renewal of the dissatisfaction which had been recently oc- 
casioned among the Twelve by Jesus’ repellent prediction 
of suffering. If so, Peter relieved the situation, by call- 
ing attention to the fact that they had done what Jesus 
required of the rich man, abandoned homes and busi- 
ness: “Peter began to say unto him: ‘Lo, we have left 
all, and followed thee.” Jesus spoke with apprecia- 
tion of this sacrifice and assured them that it would be 
rewarded in the remaining portion of the present age 
by their getting a hundred times as much property and as 
many relatives as they had given up, and in addition the 
blessed eternal life of the Coming Age. This seems to 
be a characteristically picturesque statement of the fact 
that the friendships and spiritual possessions of the present 
time of sacrifice and persecution were incomparably more 
valuable than all that had been sacrificed. Jesus, as often, 
may be here speaking out of his own experience. He 
had been constantly finding among the people those who 
in penitence and devotion set their faces toward the New 
Order, ready to do the will of God. He had already ex- 
pressed his appreciation of them when he said: ‘“Whoso- 
ever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother and 
sister and mother.” 2° He had found spiritual values con- 
sisting in friendship and work together with God and 
man for high ends, far better than anything that he had 
sacrificed by leaving his Nazareth home and business. 

The Matthew Gospel draws a picture of reward in the 
Coming Age which represents the sort of Kingdom antici- 
pated by the Jewish Christians among whom this Gospel 
was compiled.*® It predicts the long expected national 
“rebirth,” or “regeneration,” when the twelve tribes will 


” Mk. III:35. 
© Mt. XIX :28-30. 


Resumes Pusuic Traciuina 287 


be gathered in from all over the earth and each apostle 
be the head of a tribe. Luke, as well as the compiler of 
the Matthew Gospel, found some such picture in Q, al- 
though Luke (whether with greater or less faithfulness 
to Q is uncertain) omits the reference to the national 

“regeneration” and pictures the twelve apostles as regu- 
larly having special places at Jesus’ own table in the great 
banquets of the Kingdom.*? 

The Matthew Gospel adds a parable illustrating the fact 
that there will be many, like the respectable rich man, 
who seem to have the first and best chance to enter the 
Kingdom, who will nevertheless enter, if at all, at the very 
last. “But many shall be last that are first; and first 
that are last.” °* The parable is a story out of the life 
of those with whom Jesus had so much to do, workmen in © 
need of the day’s wage in order to live. The owner of a 
vineyard sympathized with the unemployed so deeply 
that he went himself, instead of sending a steward, to 
the various markets where the unemployed gathered. He 
kept going all through the day even to the eleventh hour, 
just before sunset. When his steward paid them off at 
night he directed him to pay them according to their need 
and not according to their earning. Those hired at the 
eleventh hour were to be paid off first and to receive a 
full day’s wage. From the standpoint of the Matthew 
Gospel the meaning is clear enough. It was the “un- 
shepherded sheep,” the common folk, the penitent pub- 
licans and sinners, whom Jesus was gathering in at the 
end of the age, who would come up first for entrance 
into the Kingdom, rather than the scribes, the rulers and 
the rich who were so sure that they had earned special 
privilege. The point comes out more explicitly a little 


= XXIT:28-30. 
= Mt. XIX :30-XX:16. 


288 Tuer Lire anp Tracuine or Jesus 


later when “Jesus said unto them (the chief priests and 
elders of the people), Verily I say unto you that the 
publicans and the harlots go into the Kingdom of God 


before you.” *4 
= Mt. XXI:31. 


OHAPTER XXVITI 


IN THE BORDERLAND OF JUDZA AND 
PERAZA (Concluded); STARTING 
FOR JERUSALEM 


ERUSALEM had been the center of danger for 
J months. Great scribes from the city had come into 
Galilee, denouncing Jesus as an ally of Satan and 

prepared to assist in his arrest and execution, As soon 
as he should now pass out of Perea into Judea he would 
be within the jurisdiction of the Great Court, the Jeru- 
salem Sanhedrin, in which leading scribes had an influence 
rivaled only by that of its priestly members. Accord- 
ing to the Gospel of John Jesus had made visits to Jeru- 
salem.of which there is no record in the first three Gospels, 
and had been in danger of losing life there.t Never- | 
theless Jesus now pressed on toward the point of danger, 
often walking alone ahead of his disciples in tense deter- 
mination to reach the city. His conduct amazed many of 
his followers. Those who, like the Twelve, followed 
steadily did so with foreboding: “And ‘they were-on the 
way, going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was going before 
them; and they were amazed; and they that followed were 
TARRE ue 

For the third time Mark records an almost stereotyped 
condensation of Jesus’ teaching to the inner circle re- 

* Jn. pee : 10-14, VIII:59, X1:53-57. 

*Mk, X 

289 


290 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


garding “death,” “resurrection” and a “three days” period, 
this time adding a reference to the official scourging that 
would precede execution and to the rough burlesque of 
royalty that Jesus was to suffer at the hands of brutal 
soldiers in the Roman barracks.* The disciples’ attitude 
toward whatever Jesus said to them on this subject prob- 
ably remained what it had been in earlier discussions (p. 
238). 

In the face of Jesus’ solemn expectation of suffering the 
political ambition of two prospective leaders flames out.‘ 
They are so preoccupied with the idea of personal honors 
in the Kingdom, to their minds so near at hand, that they 
cannot seriously consider any other aspects of the situa- 
tion. The Matthew Gospel puts part of the blame for 
this obtuseness on the mother; Luke omits the shameful 
scene entirely. The two brothers, James and John, ask 
Jesus to make a definite pledge to them of the two highest 
offices in the new state. Why did these offices seem 
desirable? What functions did they picture themselves 
performing? Did they see themselves in public proces- 
sions at the temple, and making long journeys to distant 
parts of the world attended by such retainers as they were 
accustomed to see in royal processions on the world high- 
ways that ran through Palestine? Was it a peasant’s 
dream of irresponsible power, more possible under the 
oriental conditions of that day than in modern times when 
the personal responsibility of rulers is greater and rulers 
can in various ways be called to account by public senti- 
ment for abuse of power? In his reply Jesus reminded 
them of the suffering through which he and his must 
pass before the period of power should come. They evi- 
dently had no clear idea of what Jesus meant by any of 


* Mk. X:32-34, Mt. XX:17-19, Lk. XVIII:31- 34. 
“Mk. X:35-45, Mt. XX:20-28. 


STARTING FOR JERUSALEM 991 


his references to prospective suffering, but they eagerly 
assured him that they were ready for anything. Jesus 
then told them that he had no authority to fill the offices 
they wished to hold. These offices would be held by those 
whom God should select: “to sit on my right hand or. on 
my left hand is not mine to give; but it is for them for 
whom it has been prepared (by my Father, Mt.).” The 
Gospel narrative imparts a tinge of sadness to the words 
of Jesus. These two men were said by Jesus to be ask- 
ing for more than they realized. ‘They were, indeed, to 
drink the same cup that he drank. It seems to be im- 
plied that a martyr’s death awaited both. By the time 
that Mark’s Gospel was compiled at least one of the 
two had been executed.°® 

When the ten learned what had happened they were * 
very indignant at the unfair attempt made by the two 
brothers. Jesus called them together and spoke to them 
in a way which suggests what had really been in the 
minds of the two men. They had wished to be able to 
give orders with oriental arbitrariness and see them in- 
stantly carried out. Jesus tried to shame them by an 
appeal to national pride, describing their conduct as 
“Gentile” conduct. The officials of Gentiles “lord it over 


them, and their great ones exercise authority over them.” ® 


The spirit that Jesus desired to see has been already con- 
sidered. He emphasizes the fact here that he was him- 
self not dreaming of arbitrary power. He was expect- 
ing “to give his life as a ransom for many.” In his 
vision of the future he saw “many,” throngs of people, 
“ransomed,” that is, set at liberty from some form of 
bondage. Bondage to what? Apparently to that against 
which all Jesus’ teaching is a protest, the selfish, evil 


5 Acts XII:1-2. 
®Mk. X:42. 


292 Tue Lire anp Tracnine or Jesus. 


will to power, whether demonic, as the early Chris- 
tians thought, or purely human. He saw a race of men 
freed from the handicap of selfishness and all its disastrous 
train of consequences. It was the sacrifice of the life 
of the Son of Man on the threshold of the New Age that 
would introduce the Age of good will, the Age of the 
brotherly sons of God. How did Jesus think that the 
sacrifice of his life would serve to produce, this result ? 
He gives no reply at this point. The question is be- 
queathed to Christian experience and thought. How has 
the death of Jesus served to break the dominance of the 
evil will to selfish power in the life of man? Or how 
is it tending more and more to do so? How are men 
actually being made better by the death of Jesus? This 
question will appear again as Jesus comes closer to the 
place where he “gives his life.” 

Jesus and his company constituted one of many groups 
in the long procession of Passover pilgrims crossing the 
Jordan at the Jericho Fords, and singing psalms as. they 
made their way among the palm groves and gardens of 
the tropical Jericho plain. Two notable incidents 
occurred in the city of Jericho where Jesus and his dis- 
ciples spent the last night before they reached Jeru- 
salem. In one of them Jesus had a characteristic experi- 
ence with a rich tax collector’ and in the other with a 
blind beggar. The tax collector was one of the head 
collectors of the district, evidently a business man of 
executive ability and probably none too scrupulous, for 
he had piled up a very large fortune. He had been hear- 
ing that Jesus, the famous prophet of Galilee, was in 
the neighbourhood of the city. He knew that Jesus was 

"Lk. XIX:1-10. 


®Mk. X:46-52, Mt. XX:29-34, Lk. XVIII:35-43. 
®*Mk. X:1. 


STARTING FOR JERUSALEM 293 


famous as the strange prophet who preached the nearness 
of the Kingdom of God and yet, on the very eve of the 
Judgment Day, did not hesitate to associate with irre- 
ligious men like himself. Jesus and his large company of 
Galilean pilgrims entered the city late in the afternoon 
and the city turned out to see him. The collector, who 
was a short man, climbed a tree at a point where he saw 
that Jesus would pass, in order to see him well. When 
Jesus reached the place, he noticed the man in the tree 
and saw something in his face that instantly arrested 
his attention. He found out who he was and asked him 
to give him lodging for the night. Many in the crowd 
showed that they were shocked at this. It was bad enough 
to enter such a man’s house and eat his “unclean” food 
at any time, but specially reprehensible at a time when 
all the devout were preparing to observe the holy fes- 
tival1° The collector, deeply moved by the friendli- 
ness of Jesus and fearful that he might after all lose 
his guest, resolved at any cost to keep him. He knew 
the two things that Jesus chiefly stood for as the prophet 
of righteousness: friendliness and honesty. He promised, 
therefore, on the spot to give half of his entire estate to 
the poor and to pay back fourfold every dishonest over- 
charge that he had ever made. This probably used up 
most of his property. Jesus saw in him a man now 
all ready for the honest and friendly life of the King- 
dom, and declared that “salvation,” that is, life in the 
Kingdom of God, had that day come to him and his 
household; he was a true son of Abraham, the father of 
. the true Israel to which the Kingdom belonged. He had 
been “ost,” lost out of the family of God, out of the re- 
lationship which the honest and friendly man sustains to 
the people among whom he lives, but now he had found 
* Of. Jn. XI:55, 


294 Tus Lirn aNp TxAcuine or JEsus 


his place again. Luke seems to himself to have pictured 
Jesus in the very act of saving a lost man and adds the 
comment, “For the Son of Man came to seek”—as he 
had sought entrance into this man’s house—‘“and to save 
that which was lost.”’ What took place in the collector’s 
house as Jesus met his family and talked with him in the 
seclusion of the housetop through the evening under the 
stars we should be glad to know. Jesus must always have 
been an entertaining guest, with his keen sense of humor, 
genial friendliness and clear insight into the everlasting 
realities of life. It would be still more interesting to 
know what thoughts were in the reformed publican’s mind 
a few days later when he heard of Jesus’ execution and the 
events that succeeded it. 

_ The other incident occurred as Jesus was leaving Jericho 


‘the next day for the final stage of his journey to Jeru- 


salem. A blind beggar sitting by the roadside learned 
from those around him who was going by, and instantly, 
without trying first to be brought to Jesus, began to shout 
at the top of his voice. The startling thing was that he 
called Jesus by a Messianic title: ‘When he heard the 
crowd passing by he inquired what this was. They ex- 
plained to him that Jesus the Nazarene was going by; 
and he shouted, saying, Jesus, Son of David, pity me.” 
The people about him tried to quiet him, but he only 
shouted the more. Jesus stopped, had him brought to 
him, found out what he wanted and told him that his 
faith had cured him. At this word of assurance the nerves 
of sight began to function. With the intense joy of a 
man whose world of darkness and beggary had been turned 
into a world of light and work, he joined the crowd going 
up the long fifteen miles of steep ascent to Jerusalem. 
The fact that he applied a Messianic title to Jesus shows 
that, although Jesus had concealed his Messianic conscious- 


STARTING FOR JERUSALEM 295 


ness, there was more or less of popular talk about the 
possibility of his turning out to be the Messiah. When 
the air was charged with the idea of the nearness of the 
Kingdom, it was inevitable that such rumours should 
gather about so great a prophet as Jesus. It evidently 
seemed to Mark most significant that as they drew near 
to the capital city, the Messianic cry should be raised by 
a representative of those for whom Jesus had been so 
deeply concerned, the sick and the poor. 

Luke inserts at this point a parable very like one that 
appears in another context in the Matthew Gospel.*? 
Luke, unlike the Matthew compiler, seizes upon a single 
minor point in the parable as suitable to this context 
although the main drift of the story has nothing to do 
with this point. According to Luke the Twelve believed 
that the Kingdom of God would begin during the next 
few days in Jerusalem. The Passover festival which 
brought together multitudes of Jews from all over the 
world seemed to them the natural time for Jesus to make 
his Messianic consciousness public and to await the en- 
dorsement of God. He “spake a parable because he was 
nigh to Jerusalem and because they supposed that the 
Kingdom of God was immediately to appear.” It was the 
story of a nobleman who went into a far country to receive 
_ for himself a Kingdom—like some of the Herods going 
to Rome—and to return, the implication from Luke’s 
standpoint being that Jesus had yet to go into a far 
country in order to receive his Kingdom and that it was 
his “return” for which men ought to be looking. Then 
follows the main body of the parable, which like the 
_ Matthew rendering of it, tells how the nobleman’s servants 
used the money he left with them for investment during 


his absence (p. 345). Another peculiar feature is added 
“Lk. XIX:11-27, Mt. XXV:14-30. 


296 Tur Lire anp Tracuine or Jzsvs 


by Luke, namely, that the nobleman’s subjects (distin- 
guished from his servants), sent a protest to the authority 
from whom he expected to receive his Kingdom (again 
like the experience of one of the Herods), and that con- 
sequently when he returned, successful in his quest, he had 
them slaughtered before his eyes. 

Sometime late in the day, after hours of hard climb- 
ing,’? the group of people traveling with Jesus reached 
the city. Just before they entered something happened 
that later seemed of great significance as the early Chris- 
tians looked back upon it.1* They. recognized the fact, 
so evident in their day, that Jesus was now virtually 
presenting himself in the capital of the nation as a Mes- 
sianic leader for acceptance or rejection by the national 
leaders. It was entirely natural that this should have 
been less evident at the time than later. The language 
used by the people on this occasion, as reported by the 
oldest Gospel, does not explicitly call Jesus the Messiah ; 
it is ambiguous, as applicable to a great prophet of the 
coming Kingdom as to the Messiah. The later Gospels, 
Matthew and Luke, transform Mark’s language into a 
definite ascription of Messiahship to Jesus.** 

Mark reports that when Jesus and his company drew 
near to Bethany and Bethphage, eastern suburbs of Jeru- 
salem, Jesus sent two of the disciples to a hamlet, telling 
them to bring a colt of an ass which they would find tied — 
there. If any one should object they were to say that 


The difference of level between Jerusalem and the Jericho plain 
is about three quarters of a mile, although the places are only 
fifteen miles apart. 

18Mk, XT:1-10, Mt. XXI:1-9, Lk. XTX :28-38. 

“Mk, XI:9-10, “Hosanna! Blessed (be) he that comes in the 
name of the Lord.’ Blessed (be) the coming Kingdom of our father 
David!” Mt. XXI:9, “Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed (be) 
he that comes in the name of the Lord. Lk. XIX:38, “Blessed (be) 
the King that cometh in the name of the Lord,” 


SrartTinc FOR JERUSALEM | 297 — 


their lord had need of it. It was assumed that the ob- 
Jectors would know, at least after a word of explanation, 
who they were and that Jesus, now famous the country 
over, was their “lord,” or teacher. It is uncertain ‘whether 
Mark means this to indicate supernatural knowledge on 
the part of Jesus or some private arrangement that he 
had previously made with friends. In any case it repre- 
sents the arrangement to have been definitely planned by 
Jesus. The animal would be one that had never been 
used, which to the Jewish mind would indicate that it 
was now to be used for some holy purpose.4° When the 
animal was brought Jesus mounted it. Some in the 
crowd picked twigs from trees and strewed them in his 
path; many took off their cloaks and spread them on the 
ground before him. Some in the crowd certainly did 
this as an expression in pantomime of the hope that he 
would turn out to be the Messiah. Restoration of sight 
had made the blind beggar doubly sure that Jesus would 
be the Messiah and he no doubt had been expressing his 
conviction with enthusiasm all day. Jesus must have 
realized. that there was this feeling in the crowd, and he 
deliberately, though not in words, encouraged it. He had 
often found the suggestive parable a congenial way of 
expressing his thought.. This was a situation in which 
his Messianic consciousness expressed itself in a kind of 
acted parable. As in the case of most of his spoken 
parables, there was no definite challenge to direct opposi- 
tion. Roman spies in the crowd would have found nothing 
alarming to report. A few scores, possibly several hun- 
dreds of poor people, were amusing themselves on the 
journey by a harmless piece of pantomime in which (ac-_ 
cording to Mark) they simply expressed the hope that 
the Kingdom, which everyone knew the prophet to have 
“Num. XIX:2, Deut. XXTI:3. 


298 THE Lire AND TEACHING OF JESUS 


been preaching for months, might indeed be near. Noth- 
ing took place which the Jewish authorities were able 
to use as evidence against Jesus when a few days later 
he was on trial for his life. Even according to the Mat- 
thew Gospel, which gives a more definitely Messianic 
coloring to the occasion, as soon as the crowd entered the 
city and were called upon to explain their unusual en- 
thusiasm, they simply reported that they were with Jesus, 
the Galilean prophet. “And when he was come into Jeru- 
salem all the city was stirred, saying ‘Who is this? And 
the multitudes said, “This is the peantes Jesus, from 
Nazareth of Galilee. 77 10 

And yet this scene gave expression to the deepest emo- 
tions in the heart of Jesus. He had now fully accepted 
a mission in some sense Messianic. He was coming to 
his capital city. He was coming not on a war horse with 
armed men about him, but on the animal used in times 
of peace. Perhaps the Zechariah passage cited in the 
Matthew Gospel may have been in Jesus’ own mind: 


“Tell ye the daughter of Zion, 
Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, 
Meek, and riding upon an ass, 

And upon a colt the foal of an ass.” ™ 


He was a poor man’s Messiah, riding on a borrowed ani- 
mal, with poor people all about him. He came to his 
capital with only an inner equipment: his sense of the 
presence of God; his ideals of life.and the certainty that 
it was under his leadership that God meant these ideals 
to be realized; and his readiness to suffer death for the 
accomplishment of this result. 


7° Mt. XXT:10-11. 
1 Zech. IX:9. The Matthew Gospel understands the language of 


the prophecy to describe two animals. 


STARTING FOR JERUSALEM 299 


The special source used by Luke pictures Pharisees 
in the crowd objecting to the conduct of the enthusiasts 
and pictures Jesus lamenting the doom of the city that 
lay sullenly waiting for him, all unconscious of the true 
significance of his arrival: 

“And as he was now drawing nigh, even at the descent 
of the mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples 
began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for 
all the mighty works which they had seen; saying, Blessed 
is the King that cometh in the name of the Lord; peace 
in heaven and glory in the highest. And some of the 
Pharisees from the multitude said unto him, Master, re- 
buke thy disciples. And he answered and said, I tell 
you that, if these shall hold their peace, the stones will 
cry out. And when he drew nigh, he saw the city and 
wept over it, saying, If thou hadst known in this day, 
even thou, the things which belong unto peace! but now 
they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come 
upon thee when thine enemies shall cast up a bank about 
thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every 
side, and shall dash thee to the ground, and thy children 
within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone 
upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy 
visitation.” 18 


* Lk. XIX :37-44, 


CHAPTER XXVIII 
WHAT DID MESSIAHSHIP MEAN TO JESUS? 


ESUS developed a religious experience which, more 
J surely than ever after nineteen centuries, is seen 
to be vitally related to the higher life of man. Ac- 
cording to the sources one feature of the experience in its 
later period was consciousness of what the Jews ealled 
“Messiahship.” This consciousness was a part of the 
personal character of Jesus. Messiahship was not an 
office, which he held as a man might hold a presidential - 
office, but a personal responsibility involving certain vital 
relations with God and men that constitute character. 
Since his Messianic consciousness was an essential feature — 
of his character, it must have been, like all character, to 
some extent at least, a growth. In the preceding chapters 
an effort has here and there been made to discern in the 
Gospels the stages of this development. Naturally these 
stages are only very dimly traceable. Those who compiled 
the Gospels were not concerned to do anything so academic 
and theological as consciously to trace such development. 
The Gospels were compiled to meet what their compilers 
recognized to be the immediate vital needs of their own 
generation and possibly of the generation immediately 
to follow. They were interested in Jesus as a matured 
Messiah, after he had “learned obedience through the 
things which he suffered” and had become: “a source of 
eternal salvation to all them that obey him.” + They called — 

4Heb. V:8-9. 
300 


Wuart Mressrausuip Mrant to Jrsvus 301 


him “The Messiah,” “The Christ,’ “The Son of God,” 
“The Son of Man,” “The Lord,” leaving each free to sup- 
ply whatever context he might naturally put into any 
one of these titles. These, and other related titles, are 
to us mere names, each one varying in meaning at differ- 
ent periods in the history of its use. The question of 
vital interest to us is this: When Jesus near the end 
of his life came up to the capital city, what was the 
nature of the feeling that he best described to himself 
as the conviction of ‘‘Messiahship”? The answer is rea- 
sonably clear. In general it was the conviction that God 
had laid upon him the personal responsibility of unique 
leadership in establishing true religion in the world, leader- 
ship in bringing God’s ideal of righteousness to secure 
realization in the lives of all men. All men were neces- 
sarily in a Jewish Messiah’s vision. If there was to be 
a Messiah at all, in the Kingdom of God, he would neces- 
sarily operate on a world scale. The Kingdom of God, 
in all forms of the idea, whether more or less provincial, 
was the dominion of God through the Jew over all the 
world. 

Is there in the Gospels any evidence regarding the 
nature of Jesus’ connection with God that finally resulted 
in fastening the conviction of Messianic leadership upor 
his mind? The conviction was evidently an outgrowth 
of his experience in feeling and doing the will of God, 
of his experience in obediently exploring the will of God. 
To Jesus the will of God was a mighty force close at 
hand and vitalizing all things. It was clothing the flowers 
with beauty, providing the birds with food, dropping the 
rain and keeping the sun shining on the fields of righteous 
and unrighteous farmers, feeling a warm fatherly sym- 
pathy with all the common needs and cares of men, women 


302 Tus Lire anp TEAcHING oF JESUS 


and children, always silently speaking into them thoughts 
that, if received, would enlarge their lives.” 

As we have seen, Jesus felt this mighty loving energy 
rising within himself and overflowing in the forgiveness 
of sins and the healing of disease. Between this loving — 
will and himself there were the steady interplay of feel- 
ing and interchange of thought that constitute true 
prayer. As it rose within him it kindled his great pas- 
sion for a righteous world in which honesty and friendli- 
ness should characterize all men in all their relations to 
God and their fellowmen. Out of such experience with 
the will of God was born the conviction that God ex- 
pected of him unique leadership in the sphere of feeling 
and doing the will of God. The “wise and knowing’ re- 
ligious leaders of his nation were accustomed to call un- 
trained men, like himself and his disciples, “babes” who 
needed scribal feeding and training.* But his experience ~ 
of the will of God made him sure that he was far above 
them. This assurance did not beget pride in him, but 
only gratitude and “meekness.” An utterance in a period 
of exultant prayer, when “‘he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit,” 
was deeply impressed upon the minds of his disciples: “I 
thank thee, Father, Lord of the heaven and the earth, that 
thou hast concealed these things from ‘wise and knowing’ 
men, and hast revealed them to ‘babes.’ Yea, Father, (1 
thank thee) that it was well pleasing in thy sight (so to 
do). To me all things have been delivered by my Father 
and no one knows well the Son (knows who the son is, 
Lk.) except the Father; neither does anyone know well 
the Father (who the Father is, Lk.) except the Son, and 
he to whom the Son wills to reveal him.” * The form of 


2Mt. V:43-48, VI:25-30, IV:4. 
* Of. Rom. I1:17-20. 
“Mt. X1:25-27, Lk. X:21. 


Wuat Messransnie Meant To Jusus 303 


this utterance, especially in Luke, may slightly reflect the 
theological interests of the Gospel compilers, but in any 
case the consciousness of a uniquely intimate acquaintance 
with God stands textually secure. This is the conscious- 
ness that is expressed by the words whatever be the nature 
of the ‘“‘sonship”—ethical, official or metaphysical. That 
is, Jesus had mysterious dimensions, or reaches, of person- 
ality that gave him capacity for unique leadership in feel- 
ing the will of God in its bigness and intensity, and in 
making that inner adjustment to the will of God that con- 
stitutes character. Combined with this was the feeling 
that he must exercise the leadership for which his experi- 
ence with God had fitted him. He could not do otherwise 
without failing in moral character, for the essential nature 
of the will of God was its urge to share. No man in true 
obedient contact with it could have any good thing for 
himself alone. When Jesus found himself experiencing 
in unique degree the intimate and obedient contact with 
the will of God, described in the passage just quoted, it 
was inevitable that he should feel himself thrust out into 
the position of leadership described in the sentence that 
follows it: “Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy 
laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke (of the 
law) upon you and learn of me, for I am meek and lowly 
in heart and ye shall find rest unto your pouls, 5 the 
“rest” that consists in the reproduction of Jesus’ contented 
adjustment to the vast will of God. 

It was this inner sense of being thrust forward by the 
will of God into the responsibilities of supreme religious 
leadership which he was qualified by personal experience 
to exercise, that drove Jesus to assume the Messianic title. 
In the Jewish thought world there was no other name for 
the function that he felt himself under moral obligation 

‘Mt. X1:28-29. 


304. Tue Lirk anp TRAOCHING oF JESUS 


to perform. Prophets urged on by God could warn and 
threaten, invite and promise with a certain sense of divine 
authority back of them, but the mere prophet could not 
feel what the Messiah felt, namely, capacity and conse- 
quent responsibility for, and the mighty urge of God 
toward, the exercise of supreme leadership in the higher 
life of man. 

Jesus’ consciousness of Messianic leadership involved 
profound interest in all men and sublime confidence in 
their capacity to follow their leader in feeling and doing 
the will of God. His own inner urge from the will of 
God to lead, meant an inner urge from the will of God 
in them to follow. What we call the “love of God” was 
urging him out toward them through the kindling of his 
own soul, and was drawing them to him through the 
kindling of penitence and devotion in them. He felt 
that they were capable of following in whatever path he 
was capable of leading. He confidently assumed that he 
could lead them into his own prayer experience. He en- 
couraged them to pray in groups of two or three, being 
sure that he himself would be praying in spirit with them, 
and would be sharing with them his own victorious sense 
of God’s answer (a saying that was afterward used by the 
Christian preachers as a promise of the spiritual presence 
of their risen Lord in heaven with his praying disciples 
on earth®.) He believed that he could lead them into his 
own experience of power through faith in God, into the 
honor of suffering with him in order to bring in the King- 
dom of God. They could be as closely related to him as a 
brother or sister or mother, if they would join him in 
doing the will of God: “For whosoever shall do the will 
of God, this one is my brother and my sister and my 

*Mt. XVIII:19-20. 


Wuat Massransuip Meant to Jzsus 305 


mother.” * These implications, like most others in the 
first three Gospels, come to more explicit expression in 
the Fourth Gospel. There he definitely proposes to share 
his mission, his power to forgive sins, the increased power 
to do mighty works which will be his when he is once 
again with God in the unseen world, and in general his 
entire relation to God: “Go to my brothers and say to 
them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my 
God and your God.” 8 ; 

The various phases of this great experience with the 
will of God, group themselves under three ideas that run 
through all his teaching, namely, the Fatherhood of God, 
a phrase that connotes superior power and loving care over 
beings like in kind to himself and indebted to him for 
existence; the brotherhood of man, or the unity of the 
human race; and personal immortality, or the durability 
of the righteous individual in a brotherhood unimpaired 
by the phenomenon of physical death. Jesus was not the 
original discoverer of these ideas, for they all appear 
either before his day or among contemporaries uninflu- 
enced by his thought. They are ideas that more and more 
evidently seem to represent the central trend of the moral 
evolution of man, which is the unfolding will of God. But 
Jesus in his exploration of the will of God conceived them 
with the peculiar simplicity and warmth of intense per- 
sonal experience, and with a sense of their unity or in- 
separableness. They appear in simple form unencumbered 
by the mass of non-essential and unworthy matter some- 
times associated with them elsewhere. They have the 
penetrating warmth of intense personal experience and 
not the chill abstraction generally characteristic of their 


™Mk. III:35. 
* Jn. XX:17, 21, 23, XIV:12-14. 


306 Tue Lire anp Tuacuine o¥ Jxsus 


presentation in more philosophical connections. And they 
are a unity. Religion and ethics, the Fatherhood of God 
and the brotherhood of man, are presented as inseparable; 
and personal immortality is assumed, in the idea of the — 
Kingdom, as essential to the proper development of both 
sonship and brotherhood. 

Since Jesus in his obedient exploration of the will of 
God adjusted himself perfectly to what he discovered 
(‘becoming obedient even unto death’’),® he became the 
revelation of the character of God. As the thought is ex- 
pressed in the Gospel of John, because of perfect sub- 
mission to the will of God, he became the perfect expression 
of the character of God. Because of this he could express 
consciousness of authority as the representative of God— 
“all things have been delivered unto me by my Father” 
—1in almost the same sentence in which he spoke of himself 
as “meek and lowly in heart.” 1° It was a consciousness 
that was at the same time uplifting and subduing. 

The sort of authority exercised by Jesus in view of his 
Messianic consciousness was peculiarly favorable to the 
development of character in others. Authority that is 
based on the leader’s experience and that summons others 
to try for a similar experience, is an authority that stimu- 
lates character. It is not the sheer, arbitrary authority 
that insists on unquestioning obedience, which is always 
unfavorable to the growth of character. It is rather the 
sort of authority that necessitates the initiative requisite 
in the nature of the case for character. 

From this view of the matter it is easy to see why Jesus 
only gradually reached the conclusion that his mission was — 
“Messianic.” It took time for him to explore the will of 
God and find himself necessitated by his discoveries to be 


*Phil. IT:8. 
* Mt. X1:27, 29. 


_ Wuat Messtansure Mrant to Jxsus 307 


the Messiah. It is also easy to see why he should have 
been solicitous about concealing his Messianic conscious- 
ness when it did form within him. He needed first to 
put before the nation the great ideals of righteousness. that 
he found in his exploration of the will of God. The 
Messianic idea was historically so knit up with political 
and nationalistic aspirations that its religious aspects suf- 
fered. Even his most intelligent disciples, as we have 
seen, were so intoxicated by ambitious dreams of future 
political greatness that for a while they nearly lost their 
moral balance. Nevertheless there seems to have been no 
way for Jesus’ inner consciousness of world leadership to 
find historical footing and to become real, either in his own 
mind or in the minds of his countrymen, except in the 
form of a “Messianic” consciousness. 

We may recognize the provincial and temporary charac- 
ter of Messianism, but the religious experience of Jesus, 
to which the idea was a temporary necessity, remains an 
everlasting and increasingly redemptive fact. Jesus is to- 
day the supreme leader and redeemer of men in the 
sphere of their higher life because he had the supreme 
religious experience. He redeems men from the power 
of the evil will by leading them into such a share of his 
own experience as they are able with the help of his 
immortal Spirit to achieve. 


CHAPTER XXIX 


JESUS IN COLLISION WITH THE PRIESTS; 
PRIESTS AND SCRIBES COMBINE 


pect from the great Jerusalem scribes. He had al- 

ready faced some of them in Galilee where they had 
declared him an ally of Satan, sent to seduce God’s peo- 
ple from allegiance to the law (p. 118). He in turn had 
felt it necessary to criticize them severely in his public 
teaching,’ a proceeding that tended to destroy their pro- 
fessional reputation and undermine their influence with 
the people. The personal element had entered into the 
situation, as is often the case in theological or scientific 
controversy, and had made the scribes doubly bitter against 
him. 

Jesus, however, proceeded at once in Jerusalem to an- 
tagonize another powerful class whose representatives have 
not previously appeared in the Gospel narrative, the 
priests of Jehovah’s temple. The head priests were lead- 
ing Sadducees and most of the scribes were Pharisees, 
so that in now antagonizing the priests Jesus massed 
against himself the whole force of a well organized 
ecclesiastical and theological “machine.” He had be 
hind him, however, a large unorganized popular follow- 
ing. Although he had never countenanced the radical 
revolutionary movement of Judas and Saddouk (p. 35), he 


1Mk. VII:6-13, 


J ESUS came to Jerusalem knowing well what to ex- 


308 


CoLLISION WITH PRIESTS AND SORIBES 309 


was the hero of the people, especially in Galilee. Many 
citizens of Jerusalem may have been under the influence 
of the “machine.” Their immediate financial prosperity 
would have depended upon the favor of the powerful 
priests of the temple and the great scribes of the numerous 
synagogues in the city. The temple must have brought an 
unusual amount of business to the city because it at- 
tracted thousands of pilgrims and required large numbers 
of animals and other offerings for sacrifice. But many of 
the best citizens of Jerusalem would have been repelled 
by close contact with the hard professionalism of the 
learned scribes, with the arrogant greed of the head priests 
and their subservience to the Romans who kept them in 
office. Citizens in Washington, outside of office holders, 
office seekers and profiteers, are not always the most en- 
thusiastic admirers of the personnel of the administration. 

Just now the city was filling up with thousands of Pass- 
over pilgrims from various parts of the world. Those 
who came from distant regions would know little or noth- 
ing about Jesus except what they heard after reaching the 
city. Those who came from northern Syria, from. the 
ghettos of the great cities east of the Jordan? and perhaps 
even from the Alexandrian ghetto, would have heard 
rumors of his power as an exorcist, healer and unorthodox 
religious teacher. 

When Jesus and his friendly company of Passover 
pilgrims entered the city they went immediately through 
another gate into the sacred quarter which contained the 
House of Jehovah and the extensive paved open courts 
that surrounded it.2 In these open courts and spacious 


2Mk. III:8. 
* This walled quarter in the southeastern part of the city was per- 


haps a third of a mile long from north to south and a sixth of a 
mile wide. 


810 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


porticoes they mingled with hundreds of Jews and 
proselytes from all over the world. Many of these pil- 
grims perhaps fell on their faces and thanked God that 
they were able once more to look across the terraced 
courts at the beautiful House of Jehovah, gleaming in 
white and gold, which none but superior priests might 
approach. Since it was late in the day Jesus and the 
Twelve soon went out to Bethany, an eastern suburb 
where earlier in the day or weeks before, they had ar- 
ranged with friends for lodgings during the Passover 
festival. Probably only the wealthier pilgrims were able 
to pay the high prices charged for quarters inside the 
city. Many of the poor may have camped in the open 
country. 

As he had walked about in the temple courts Jesus 
had seen things going on that aroused his indignation. 
The scene in certain courts was that of an oriental market 
rather than a place of worship. Dealers in poultry and 
live stock were there with their crates of doves for the 
poor man’s offerings and their droves of sheep and oxen. 
They could probably guarantee that the priests would 
accept their birds and animals as unblemished victims 
suitable for sacrifice. Close by were money changers, 
ready to change foreign coin into local currency. As 
Jesus watched their operations he saw that the pilgrims 
were being unmercifully cheated. High prices and ex- 
tortionate rates of exchange were being charged. This 
resulted in angry protests from many of the pilgrims. 
On every side were the excited voices of violent alterca- 
tion. Here were people who had with painful economy 
saved money enough to make the expensive journey by 
sea or land to Jerusalem in order to pray and sacrifice 


‘Mk. XI:19, “And whenever evening came, he went forth out of 
the city.” 


CoLLIsSION WITH PRIESTS AND.SCRIBES 311 


before Jehovah’s House. But who could pray in the midst 
of such confusion and with such bitter sense of being 
cheated in the very presence of Jehovah and by those 
whom the priests of Jehovah (perhaps with profit to 
themselves) had established there! 

During the night in Bethany Jesus resolved to put a 
stop to such proceedings. From a certain point of view 
there was every reason why Jesus should have acquiesced, 
at least for the present, in this situation which had be- 
come more or less traditional. He had enough powerful 
enemies already without adding a new set to their num- 
ber. Tactful conduct might win for him a largely in- 
creased following among.the Passover pilgrims, many of 
whom were well-to-do and did not mind paying a little 
extra for offerings and exchange at such a time. The 
old temptation to temporary compromise may have re- 
curred (p. 79). However, early the next morning Jesus 
was at the temple. He went at once to the merchants 
and imvigorous language told them to leave. He knocked 
over the seats which the poultry sellers were occupying 
and the tables of the money changers, sending their care- 
fully piled. coins rolling everywhere on the pavement. 
According to the Fourth Gospel ® he made himself a whip 
with which he personally drove the live stock out of the 
place. 

Mark represents him as doing one other thing calcu- 
lated to produce a quiet devotional atmosphere in the 
place. People had been accustomed to use the temple quar- 
ter as a short cut between the city and the eastern suburbs. 

°Jn. I1:15, placed at the beginning of Jesus’ public life in accord- 
ance with the general viewpoint of the Fourth Gospel. Luke omits 
everything except the general statement that “Jesus expelled the 
merchants.” Perhaps he feared that the action would seem undig- 


nified to his readers on the part of one whom he loved to describe 
as the gracious Lord. 


312 Tue Lire ann TraoHuIne oF JzEsus 


Jesus stationed some of his men at various entrances to 
the temple quarter with instructions to turn back any 
person who should appear carrying any article, and so 
evidently on some errand of business not connected with 
worship. “He would not permit anyone to carry a vessel 
through the temple.” * It may seem strange that Jesus 
should have been able so to usurp the place of the Chief 
of the Temple Police, “the Captain of the Temple,” and 
secure obedience on the part of merchants and suburban 
citizens, but he was evidently possessed of great per- 
sonal force, was known to have a large popular following 
in the city, and was correcting practises which many 
recognized as abuses. - As the ‘people heard what was 
happening hundreds must have quickly gathered. Jesus 
fearlessly proceeded to make an address to them in which 
he vigorously denounced the priests for their mal-adminis- 
tration of the temple. He asserted that the place desig- 
nated by God in the scripture as one where all nations 
were to gather for prayer, they had turned into a robber’s 
cave! They had made it a place where bad men collected 
plunder from travelers. ‘He taught and said unto them: 
Is it not written, My house shall be called a house of 
prayer for all the nations? But ye have made it a den 
of robbers.” 7 

Jesus’ action and public speech in the temple courts 
must have stirred the whole city. The scribes and head 
priests in alarm at once met together for consultation. 
All traditional differences of viewpoint were forgotten 
in their desire to defend themselves against this common 
enemy. They feared that he was planning a revolution. 
It might be the beginning of a period of disorder for which 
the Roman authorities would hold them responsible and 


° Mk. XI:16, “Vessels” translated “goods” in III:27. 
*Mk. X1:17, cf. Is. LVI:7, Jer, VII:11. 


CoLLIsION WITH PRIESTS AND.SCRIBES 313 


which would result in loss of office for the High Priest 
and his friends and loss of influence for the leading scribes. 
They began to plan for his arrest and execution as the 
scribes had earlier done in Galilee. His great popularity 
made it necessary to proceed with utmost caution: “And 
the chief priests and the scribes heard it and sought how 
they might destroy him; for they feared him, for all the 
multitude was astonished at his teaching.” ® 

The priests and scribes did nothing that day except 
appoint a committee to call Jesus to account. He ap- 
peared the next day walking about in the temple courts,’° 
perhaps looking to see whether his orders of the previous 
day were being observed. Naturally a large company 
would at once be attracted to him, and, according to the 
Matthew Gospel, he was “teaching.” Suddenly he was 
confronted by this committee composed of priests, scribes 
and a few other distinguished members of the Great 
Court.11. They at once asked him from whom he had 
received authority to do what he had done the day before. 
The question was doubtless recognized as a subtle impli- 
cation that he had received his authority from the one 
whom the scribes had all along accused him of serving, 
namely, Satan (p. 118). In his action of the preceding 
day Satan had invaded the temple of God! Jesus was 
not overawed by these great officials. Neither great audi- 
ences nor individual great men disturbed his self-posses- 
sion. He said that he would answer their question if 
they would tell him one thing, namely, from whom John 
the Baptist had received authority to call the nation to 
a repentance baptism. This was an embarrassing ques-— 


®Mk. III:6. 

*Mk. XI:18. 

Mk. XI:27. 

4 Mk. XI:27, cf. XIV:53, XV:1. 


314 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


tion because all the people held that John was a prophet 
sent from God, and if the committee should formally 
deny this they would be more unpopular than Jesus had 


already made them. More people than ever would then _ 


side with Jesus who was known to have been the friend 
and enthusiastic admirer of John.12, They had probably 
agreed with the opinion that John as well as Jesus had 
connection with Satan,!* but they did not dare to whisper 
such a suspicion now. On the other hand, if they should 
say that God sent John, they would confess themselves 
antagonistic to God, since they had kept aloof from John’s 
movement. They, therefore, weakly replied that they did 
~ not know! This was a humiliating confession of incom- 
petence as true leaders and guides of the people.: In their 
own hearts they knew that they did not dare to say what 
they thought, which was still more humiliating, and that 
they did not dare to force an answer from Jesus. The ques- 
tion which Jesus asked them was not merely a shrewd at- 
tempt to embarrass them. He was really asking them 
the question that was being informally put to every- 
one by the logic of daily events, namely, what they thought 
of himself, for John’s movement and his own had been 
closely ai sympathetically related. 

Although Jesus refused to answer their question di- 
rectly he did proceed to give a veiled answer in the form 
of parables one of which Mark reports.1* In language 
sometimes used in the Old Testament to describe Jehovah’s 
relation to the Jewish people,!® he told of a land owner 
who spent a great deal of money on his vineyard. He set 
out the vines, built a stone wall around it, equipped it with 


™Mt. XI:11. 

“Mt. XI:18, “John came neither eating nor drinking, and they 
say He hath a demon.” 

“Mk. XII:1-12, Mt. XX1I:38-46, Lk. XX:9-19. 

% i.g., Is. V. 


CoLLISION WITH PrRIEsts AND.SCRIBES 315 


its own wine press and vat, built a watchman’s tower 
for its protection from thieves, then let it out to renters 
and left the country. When in due season he repeatedly 
sent agents to collect the rent, the tenants refused to pay 
and abused the agents, even killing some of them. The 
owner, who was a strangely patient man, finally sent his 
son, sure that the renters would respect him and pay the 
rent. But the renters saw their chance to get permanent 
possession of the vineyard for themselves by killing the 
heir. Accordingly they killed him and threw the corpse 
over the wall into the road denying him a decent burial. 
(Mt. and Lk. say they took him outside to kill him, 
which probably seemed to the early Christians suggestive 
of Jesus’ suffering “without the gate’).*® Jesus said 
that the owner under such aggravating circumstances 
would come and kill the renters and give the vineyard to 
others. Then Jesus turned directly on the delegation and 
asked them with some sarcasm whether in their exhaustive 
professional study of the scriptures they had never read 
of the incompetent builders who failed to recognize the 
great stone sent up from the quarry by the architect to 
serve as corner stone in the structure: “Have ye not 
read even this scripture: ‘A stone which the builders 
rejected, this became a head of a corner. This was from 
the Lord and is wonderful in our eyes!’”1% This 
parable, or rather allegory, in a veiled way, only sus- 
piciously suggestive at the time but perfectly clear to 
the early Christians later, told who Jesus was, the Mes- 
sianic Son of God, predicted his murder and the destruc- 
tion of his murderers. The allegory was particularly 
pertinent when it made the point that the renters wanted 
the vineyard for themselves. The priests did not wish 


* Heb, XIII: 12. 
* Ps, CXVIII:22. 


316 Tur Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


for a Messiah. They preferred to have the situation 
remain as it was. The high positions and the large temple 
revenues which were now theirs might be lost to them 
if a Messiah should come. Many of the scribes were also 
well satisfied with the social prestige which they were 
enjoying and did not care to risk losing it through the 
coming of a Messiah with a new order. They were ready 
to keep the inheritance for themselves, even though they 
might have to kill the Son in order to do it. 

Mark represents the vineyard ‘to be given to “others,” 
which to his Gentile readers means Gentiles. The Mat- 
thew Gospel, in accordance with its general viewpoint, 
carefully notes that the others to whom the Kingdom 
of God will be given are “a nation” bringing forth its 
fruits, that is, a reformed Jewish nation, freed from the 
burden of its present wicked leaders, a nation to which 
of course peoples from all over the world may be annexed 
provided they keep the commandments of Moses as it rep- 
resents Jesus to have taught them to do.18 Luke adds a 
comment, either his own or attributed to Jesus, regarding 
the danger of maltreating the “corner stone.” He who 
falls on it will himself be broken; he on whom it falls 
will be scattered as dust.}® 

The Matthew Gospel adds two other parables. In one ?° 
a father sent his two sons to work in his vineyard. One 
refused to go but afterward went; the other said he would 
go, but did not. Jesus, referring to his question about 
John the Baptist, said that the penitent publicans and 
harlots, at first flagrantly disobedient but later penitently 
obedient, were like the first son; the scribes and priests 
were like the second, making large professions of obedi- 

% Mt. XXI:43, XXVIIT:20, V:17-19. 


*Lk, XX:18, cf. Is. VIII:14-15. 
™Mt. XXI:28-32. 


CoLLISION WITH PRIESTS AND SORIBES 317 


ence, but failing to obey when they had the chance to 
ally themselves with God’s great prophet John, and still 
at the present moment continuing obdurate after having 
_ seen the striking reformations in character produced by 
his preaching. “For John came unto you in the way of 
righteousness, and ye believed him not; but the publicans 
and the harlots believed him; and ye, when ye saw it, 
did not even repent yourselves afterward, that ye might 
believe him.” 

The other Matthew parable is that of the doomed city 
that insulted its king at the time of his son’s wedding.*? 
Twice after the wedding feast was all ready he sent his 
messengers to gather in the invited guests, but the sum- 
mons was absolutely ignored. The business of the city 
went on as usual, and some of the messengers were in- 
solently abused and killed. The king burned up the 
city, and destroyed its inhabitants. Then he sent his 
messengers out to gather in guests both good and bad 
from far and wide. When the king entered the banquet 
hall to inspect his guests he found a man unsuitably 
dressed. He order him to be tied fast hand and foot, to 
be carried out from the blazing light of the royal hall and 
left in the outer darkness where invisible beings would 
be heard wailing and grinding their teeth. The noise 
indicated that there were many such, who had been in- 
vited but not accepted as guests. The city of Jerusalem 
had a definite individuality distinguishing it from the 
country in general. Although the House of Jehovah was 
there and priests and great scribes filled its streets, it had 
a reputation for perversity in its relation to Jehovah 
himself, Its evil disposition toward Jesus, the Messiah 
in disguise, had been especially evident. Scribes from 
Jerusalem had attacked him in Galilee. It was a prophet 

‘Mt. XXIT:1-14. 


318 Tur Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


killing, messenger murdering city: “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, 
which killeth the prophets and stoneth them that are 
sent unto her.” ?* It had, according to Jesus’ semi- 
sarcasm, a monoply of prophet killing. “It cannot be 
that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.” ?* He had 
come to the city anticipating rejection and death at its 
hands. God had twice summoned it (as indicated in the 
parable) to prepare for the inauguration of the Kingdom 
and the Messianic Son of God, first in the preaching of 
John the Baptist, and then in the proclamation of Jesus 
and the Twelve. Instead of heeding the summons it had 
gone about its regular business, even turning the temple 
courts into a market place! It had set itself with murder- 
ous intent against both John and Jesus, facts that Jesus 
was at the moment emphasizing in his interview with the 
leaders of the city. There could be but one outcome of 
such conduct. The city would be destroyed. Then God 
would gather in the people from far and wide, shepherdless 
sheep, publicans, harlots and those from other nations 
as well (provided they respected Moses’ law),?* for other 
nations were always included in the Messianic picture’ 
of the best Judaism. 

Then follows a paragraph probably due to the shaping 
influence of the early preachers in the Jewish Christian 
circles in which the Matthew Gospel was produced. It 
is a hostile reference to the radical Gentile Christianity 
that seemed to conservative Jewish Christians to be flout- 
ing the Mosaic law. (Paul himself had occasion to pro- 
test against such, Rom. VI:15.) This element has re- 
peatedly appeared in the Matthew Gospel: those Chris- 
tian preachers who break and teach others to break com- 

™ Mt. XXIII:37. 


*™Lk. XIII:33. 
“Mt. XXVIII:20, cf. V:17-19. 


CoLLIsION WITH PRIESTS AND SCRIBES 319 


mandments of the law; *° the prophets, successful exor- 
cists and miracle workers all operating in Jesus’ name, 
but who do “lawlessness”; 7° sons of the evil one in the 
. Kingdom, close up against the righteous, causing “stumb- 
ling’ among the righteous by doing “lawlessness” ; 77 the 
“bad” gathered in with the good at the Messianic banquet, 
in the present parable (v. 10). Such persons are repre- 
sented here by the man who appeared at the Messianic 
banquet without suitable dress. He had been wordy 
enough in his blatant controversial days, but finally he 
was reduced to speechlessness (v. 12). Perhaps there 
were some among the extremely conservative Jewish 
Christians who, when they read this paragraph, thought 
they could identify the man alluded to! 78 

The committee of the Great Court realized that they 
were being attacked by Jesus in these pungent parables 
in the presence of the great crowd that eagerly pressed 
about them to listen. They could not give him an ade- 
quate answer in words and they did not dare just then 
to give him an answer in terms of brute force. They, 
therefore, withdrew to their headquarters, suspecting more 
than ever that Jesus had been tempted by his popularity 
to undertake immediately a Messianic policy: and that 
his bold assumption of authority in the temple the day be- 
fore had been the first step in it. “They were seeking to 
seize him—and feared the people—for they knew that 
he had spoken the parable with reference to them. And 
they left him and went away.” °® 

eV 319, 

* VIT:21-23. 

7 XII1I:30, 41. 


2 Of. Acts XXI:20-22. 
Mk, XII:12. 


CHAPTER XXX 


CONTINUED CONFLICT WITH THE JERU- 
SALEM PRIESTS AND SCRIBES 


EFORE tracing the further development of Jesus’ 

B relations with his powerful enemies during the 
last week of his life, attention should be given to an 
incident revealing the sense of vast inner resources with 
which he faced the deepening blackness. It is not so 
much the incident as the words of Jesus connected 
with the incident that are impressive. According to 
Mark and Matthew, Jesus, on his way to the city early 
in the morning, after the night in which he decided to 
expel the merchants from the temple, was hungry. He 
saw a fig tree in the distance, noticeable because it had 
leaves which are usually preceded by fruit,? although the 
regular fig season had not arrived. When he reached the 
tree and found nothing but leaves he expressed the wish 
that no one might ever find fruit on it. According to the 
Matthew Gospel the foliage instantly shriveled up. Ac- 
cording to Mark the tree was found withered the next day 
as Jesus and his disciples passed along. Luke omits the 
strange incident entirely. However, he, and he only, 
records a parable in which a man, who was disappointed 
by finding a fig tree fruitless for three successive years, 
proposed to cut it down, but was persuaded by his hired 
man to let him cultivate it with particular care for a 

*Mk. XI:12-14, 20-25, Mt. XXI:18-22. 
*Pliny, Nat. Hist., XVI:26. 
820 


ConFLIoT witH Priests AND SCRIBES 321 


fourth year, and then to cut it down if it should be still 
fruitless.? It is possible, as is often said, that this par- 
able grew into an historical incident in the course of 
the preaching of the pre-Gospel period. 

The Mark Gospel uses the incident as the text for a won- 
derful utterance of Jesus. It represents Jesus to have 
regarded the withering of the tree as an act of God, per- 
formed in response to what Peter called Jesus’ “curse,” 
and to have told his disciples that if they would have a 
similar faith in God, even greater results would follow 
their praying. They would not only be able to wither a 
tree, but to make the hill on which the tree was growing 
fly through the air into the distant sea. “Jesus says to 
them, Have faith in God. Verily I say unto you, Whoever 
shall say to this mountain, Be lifted up and thrown into 
the sea, and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe 
that what he is saying is happening, it shall be to him 
(as he says). For this reason I say unto you All things 
whatsoever ye pray and ask for, believe that ye received 
them and they shall be yours.” As has been suggested 
earlier, this statement lets us to some extent into the inner 
prayer life of Jesus (p. 85). The utterance, since it is 
in accord with what Jesus had said before and had often 
assumed, may be considered entirely apart from the inci- 
dent to which Mark has attached it. It is most impressive 
when heard from his lips during these last days of his 
life. He was almost in the grip of powerful merciless 
enemies, some of them conscientious, which increased the 
danger. He expected shame and death. Yet he firmly 
believed that God would express himself in some mighty 
word or act that should transform the evil earth into a 
part of the Kingdom of the Heavens. This he felt would 
be done by God through the shame and death of himself 

*Lk. XIII:6-9, 


322 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


as Messianic leader and through the followers with whom 
he would share his shame and power. They too, as well as 
he, were to “have faith in God.” Faith in God, as has 
been said before, is the reaching out of man to work 
with the unseen energy of God at any cost for the creation 
of an honest, and friendly world. Jesus appears here with 
sublime confidence in God’s power and purpose to pro- 
duce an astounding result through himself and his true 
followers in the life of faith. The will of God in mighty 
volume surging up within Jesus enabled him to overtop 
the black evil that rose in his pathway. His conscious- 
ness of direct touch with the power of God made the very 
hills seem to stir from their bases as he walked back and 
forth between the city and his lodgings, the black day 
drawing ever: nearer. He seems to have had an almost 
ecstatic sense of the power of God to produce physical 
and moral results. The mighty power of God that has 
pushed the Christian enterprise forward in all its chang- 
ing forms through the centuries was here pushing up in 
the heart of the Leader. What kind of Messianic leader- 
ship Jesus expected to exercise after his death, in what 
form he forecast the triumph that he felt sure would 
follow his death, we may not know. But he felt the 
great fact of the powerful presence of God so directly 
and distinctly that nothing, however difficult, seemed im- 
possible. The morally purifying power of such direct 
contact with the powerful will of God is evident in Jesus’ 
statement that he who feels it must have only goodwill 
in his heart. It is only the human heart of simple good 
will that can have uplifting contact with the vast good 
will of God: ‘Whenever ye stand praying forgive if ye 
have aught against any.” # 

The next step in the shrewd, hard scheming of priests 

“Mk. XI:25. 


ConFLICT WITH Priests AND ScrIBES 323 


and scribes was to attract to their coalition the so-called 
Herod party. An effort had been made to enlist this 
party against Jesus earlier in Galilee (p. 114) and recently 
in Perga in connection with the discussion of the divorce 
question. The Herods were closely connected with Rome 
from which they derived their political support and the 
priests and scribes were now hoping through them to 
arouse the sinister suspicion of the Roman authorities 
against Jesus. If he should turn out to have Messianic 
ambition smouldering in his heart, it would be well to 
have the Roman authorities suspicious of him at the 
earliest possible moment. They sent to him, therefore, 
a delegation made up of Pharisees, presumably scribes, 
and in addition certain members of the Herod party.® 
It was their purpose to lead him in an unwary moment 
to make a statement that could be used to his extreme 
disadvantage. To throw him off his guard a group 
of younger men, “disciples of the Pharisees” (Mt.), 
came to him apparently proposing to become his disciples. 
They began with unctuous flattery, complimenting him 
upon the boldness with which he had faced the imposing 
committee from the Great Court. They said it was evi- 
dent that he did not regard the social or political standing 
of men but taught sincerely the “way of God.” They as- 
sumed that in response to such an approach, leading very 
possibly to a large and influential addition to his following, 
he would be glad to discuss freely and confidentially any 
question of conscience concerning which they wished ad- 
vice. “They say to him Teacher, we know that you are 
truthful and do not care for anyone; for you do not look 
at the person of men but teach in truth the way of God. 
Is it lawful to pay the poll tax to the Emperor? Shall 
we pay it or not?’ Of course, if Jesus should advise them 
*Mk, XII:13-17, Mt. XXII:15-22, Lk, XX:20-26. 


324 Tuer Lire anp Tracutne or Jzsus 


not to pay the tax he would stand out as a confessed revo- 
 lutionist, a dangerous character who could be immediately 
reported to the Roman officials by the Herodian members 
of the delegation. Or, perhaps, as a Galilean, he would 
be handed over to Herod Antipas for punishment.® If, 
on the other hand, he without qualification advised the 
submissive payment of the tax, this unpatriotic advice 
would be published broadcast and he would lose the re 
spect of a considerable number of his popular following. 
Judas, the Galilean, had carried on a vigorous propaganda 
along this line. All those who had any sort of lurk- 
ing sympathy with these views would, to say the least, 
lose much of their interest in Jesus if it could be reported 
that in the capital city in conference with Herodians he 
had definitely declared himself on the Roman side at this 
point. His popular following would in this way be suf- 
ficiently weakened to make it safe for the priests and 
scribes to proceed against him, without fear of conse- 
quences to themselves. 

Jesus evaded the difficulty with shrewd honesty. He 
called for a silver coin that had on it the Cesar’s picture 
and name. He asked whose picture and name were there 
and when he was told said: “Give back Cesar’s things to 
Cesar and God’s things to God.” It is ordinarily said that 
in the first half of this statement Jesus argued from the 
unprotested circulation of this coin among the people their 
acceptance of Cesar’s rule and, therefore, the logical neces- 
sity of paying the Cesar’s tax. This may be true, but 
it does not sufficiently explain his emphatic reference to 
the picture on the coin. There was always an under- 
current of resentment among the people against any pic- 
ture of man, beast or bird. It seemed to them contrary 
to the commandment in the decalogue against making any 

* Of. Lk. XXTII:6-7. 


CoNFLICT WITH PRIESTS AND SCRIBES 325 


“graven image or likeness.” * One very saintly rabbi is 
reported never in all his life to have looked on a coin that 
had such a picture on it. At his burial his friends covered 
certain statues nearby so that ‘‘as in life he looked at 
no pictures neither should he see any in death.” ® Some- 
times special coins without any such likeness were minted 
for the Jews in Palestine. So when Jesus called for a 
coin and pointed to Cesar’s likeness upon it, it was with 
a tinge of humor that he virtually said: “Send Cesar’s 
picture back to Cesar! Pay the tax and get the offensive 
coin out of the country!” Then he added with great seri- 
ousness: “Give back to God what belongs to God.” That 
is, “Yield to God penitent obedience.” This reply vir- 
tually advised patience. It meant, “Pay the tax for a 
while and in the meantime by penitence be preparing the 
way for God to bring in the Kingdom.” Jesus in this 
way took ground that was probably approved by the com- 
mon sense of a majority of truly religious people through- 
out the nation. They felt that if the nation would only 
render to God penitent obedience, God would soon send 
his Messiah end give the nation world supremacy in the 
Kingdom of God. What God wanted was a nation of 
penitents and not a nation of revolutionists. In this way 
Jesus took sides neither with the extreme revolutionists 
nor with the servile priests. If he had expressed this 
view in the course of a long discussion of the subject, 
he would probably at some point necessarily have laid 
himself open to harmful misquotation by both sides. In- 
stead he made this terse, picturesque reply, which was 
absolutely to the point, which it was impossible to forget 


"Ex. XX:4, 


*Bacher, Die Agada der palestinensischen Amorder, III, p. 616. 
Abrahams, Studies in Pharisaism, pp. 62-65; Schiirer, Geschichte des 
Jiidischen Volkes, II, p. 90. 


826 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


or garble, and which because of its wit could be given — 
swift currency among the crowds to the increase of his — 
popularity. It is not strange that the members of the — 
delegation “‘were not able to take hold of the saying before © 
the people” and that they “marveled at his reply and — 
held their peace.” ® 

Jesus was next visited by a delegation of Sadducees, — 
the party to which the principal priests belonged. They — 
attempted publicly to discredit him as a teacher by show- 
ing the absurdity of belief in a life after death which 
he, as well as the Pharisees, was known to hold. These 
Sadducees argued that the law of Moses assumed the termi- 
nation of existence at the time of death, for otherwise most 
scandalous complications would result. To show this they 
presented what was probably a hackneyed case.1° The 
law of Moses + required a man to marry the childless 
widow of his brother and regard the first son of this mar- 
riage as the child of his deceased brother. In the famous 
hypothetical case, solemnly cited by the Sadducean dele- 
gation, seven brothers in turn were, in accordance with this 
law, called upon to marry the same woman. Finally, 
after the death of the seventh brother, the woman also 
died. Now in case there really was to be life after death 
horrible scandal would result, for in heaven there would 
be a polyandrous woman with seven husbands! The 
spokesman of the delegation asked, with a half concealed 
smile, which one of the seven might claim her as his wife! 
Jesus quietly assured them that their sad blunder in rea- 
soning was due to their surprising ignorance, first, of the 
scriptures, and, second, of the power of God. God had 
power to create and maintain a civilization in which the 


* Lk. XX 226, 


™ Mk. XIT:18-27, Mt. XXII:23-33, Lk. XX:27-40. 
1 Deut. XXV:5-6. 





CoNnFLICT WITH PRirests AND SCRIBES 327 


physical relationship of marriage would not be needed for 
the perpetuation of life. ‘For when they shall rise from 
the dead they neither marry nor are given in marriage 
but are as angels in heaven” (in whose existence it is 
assumed the Sadducees ought to believe, though they do 
not).?2_ Also in their lamentable ignorance of the scrip- 
tures they had failed to notice the “bush passage,”’?* which 
reported God, when speaking to Moses out of the burning 
bush, as still calling himself the God of Abraham, Isaac 
and Jacob. some centuries after they had died. It was a 
cheap, unworthy conception of God to regard him, in 
Sadducean fashion, as one who could say nothing better 
of himself than that he was the God of some dead men who 
had long ago ceased to exist! These dead men must have 
been still in existence when God was speaking to Moses. 
A God who could not keep his friends alive after death was 
certainly not the powerful God of the Hebrew scriptures: 
“Fe is not a God of dead persons, but of living persons. 
You are very much in error!” The reference to Abraham, 
Isaac and Jacob seems, on the face of it, to prove simply 
continued existence after death, not necessarily the “resur- 
rection” that the Sadducees are represented as denying 
(v.18). It may be that by “resurrection” was meant the 
passage from the dark shadowy realm of the dead into a 
desirable state of being, an experience through which the 
patriarchs mentioned are conceived to have already passed. 
Or it may be that the scripture cited is thought to prove 
that they are certain to participate in the general resurrec- 
tion when it shall occur. Jesus’ reply was greatly ad- 
mired by the people (Mt.), even by some of the scribes 
(Lk.). 

The violence of the attack on Jesus by representatives of 


3 Acts XXIII:8. 
4 Ex. III:6, 


328 Tue Lire anp TEACHING or JzEsvs 


the Great Council seemed to be abating. The approach 
of the scribes and Herodians had revealed deadly intent. 
The resurrection question raised by the Sadducees was 
more academic, though not without hostile animus. It 
in turn was now followed by another academic question, 
this time raised by a Pharisee. It was natural for rabbis 
to discuss the relative importance of various command- 
ments in the law. One of the Pharisean scribes, glad to 
see that Jesus had disconcerted the Sadducees (Mt.), now 
tested his skill as a teacher by asking him which he con- 
sidered to be the prime commandment.’* Jesus at once 
replied that it was the one commanding Israel to love God 
supremely, and volunteered a further reply in which he 
said that the second (‘“‘like” to the first, Mt.) was the one 
commanding men to love their neighbors as themselves.}5 


The meaning of these commandments has already been dis- 


cussed. The Matthew Gospel seems to imply (in ac- 
cordance with V: 18-19) that these two commandments 
sustain, and involve obligation to keep, the whole law: 
“On these two commandments hang the whole law and 
the prophets.” The scribe expressed himself as much im- 
pressed by Jesus’ reply, and Jesus in turn assured him 
that he was not far from being ready for the Kingdom 
of God. Jesus had talked in the same way to the rich 
young man of whom Mark said that Jesus “loved him” 
as he looked at him.'* Both incidents reveal the keen 
desire Jesus had to bring the scribes over to his ideal 
of the righteousness of the Kingdom of God; they show 
that it had not been easy for him to be true to his 
inner convictions at the risk of antagonizing them. 


%* Mk. XIIT:28-34, Mt. XXII:34-40, cf. Lk. X:25-28. 

% Deut. VI:5, Lev. XIX:18. The combination is found in Test. of 
the Twelve Patriarchs, Dan. V:3, “Love the Lord through all your 
life, and one another with a true heart”; cf. Issachar V:2, VII:6, 

Mk, X:21. 


—_ ee eee ee ee, 


ee ae ee eT 


OHAPTER XXXI 


JESUS DENOUNCES THE JERUSALEM: SCRIBES 


administration of the temple. Soon after he directly 

attacked the Jerusalem scribes on the ground of 
incompetence and insincerity as religious teachers. In 
his public teaching at the temple he criticized the Son of 
David conception of Messiahship that many of them held. 
He represented it, at least in the form in which they held 
it, to be contrary to scripture. He quoted Ps. CX:1, 
assuming the current idea that David was its author. In 
the psalm David is understood to say that the Lord God 
had assigned to his (David’s) Lord Messiah a seat at 
God’s right hand until such time as God should lay all — 
the Messiah’s enemies prostrate at his feet. 


Se had boldly attacked the priests for their mal- 


“The Lord said unto my Lord, 
Sit thou on my right hand 
Till I make thine enemies the footstool 
of thy feet.” 


Jesus asked how David could in this way apply the wor- 
shipful title “Lord” to his son. It was contrary to oriental 
ideas of propriety that an ancestor should so humble him- 
self before a descendant: “He, David, calls him Lord, 
whence then is he his son?” 1 The scribes seem to have 
been unable to answer this question. The answer that 


* 1Mk. XII:35-37, Mt. XXI1:41-46, Lk. XX:41-44, 
329 


| 330 Tre Lrre anp Tracnine or JEsus 


Jesus would probably have given, if he had cared to give 
an answer, is that the Messiah is to be a much more 
exalted personage than the Son of David whom the scribes 
expected ; he was to be the “Son of Man,” or “that Man” 
from heaven. As has been suggested before, Jesus’ final 
- interpretation of his own wonderful religious experience 
was that into him had come the mighty Spirit of the 
heavenly Son of Man (p. 229). This was now the secret 
of the inner circle of disciples, and was not known to the 
people whom Jesus was addressing. 

Jesus’ language here does not imply, as is sometimes 
said, that he was not a descendant of David. The be- 

lief in his Davidic lineage could hardly have been so 
- common among the early Christians, if he had been known 
to have disclaimed it. He was not the Messianic Son of 
David, but he was a Davidite into whom the Spirit of 
the heavenly Son of Man had entered. Paul recognized 
Jesus’ descent from David, but he did not hold the Son 
of David view of Messiahship; he held what was really 
the Son of Man idea, although not expressed by that title.” 

The title “Son of David” was unattractive to Jesus. 
It yielded itself too easily to the ambitions of military 
Messianism. David had been a great warrior who gave 
his people standing among the nations by his military cam- 
paigns. It was particularly desirable just now, when the 
scribes and priests were trying to make Jesus politically 
an object of suspicion among the Roman officials, that 
he should disclaim any such military ideas. He brings 
out the fact that it was the scribes who taught the Son 
of David type of Messianism, and it was, therefore, they 
that might well bear the burden of sinister Roman 
suspicion. 

Does Jesus’ reference to the Messiah’s exaltation to the 

7Rom. 1:4, cf. I Cor. XV:47. 


Jesus DENOUNCES THE JERUSALEM Scrises 331 


right hand of God while waiting for the overthrow of 
his enemies imply anything regarding Jesus’ outlook on 
his own future? He clearly anticipated death and a 
_ Speedy reappearance in full Messianic power, perhaps 
at the general resurrection (p. 237). Was he also antici- 
pating that after death he would in some way be taken 
to God until the victorious phase of his Messianic career 
should be reached at the time of the general resurrection ? 
The wonderful sense of direct contact with, and full pos- 
session by the powerful will of God, which had become 
central and dominant in his consciousness must necessarily 
have shaped his forecast of a career after death. How 
detailed this forecast was we have not data to determine. 

Jesus carried his attack upon the Jerusalem scribes 
still further in a public address before great crowds as- 
sembled in the open courts about the temple. He warned 
the people against their influence. “And in the hearing | 
of all the people he said unto his disciples, Beware of 
the scribes.” * In unsparing language, which may often 
have raised a laugh from the sympathetic element in the 
crowd, he exposed their weakness at vital points of char- 
acter. While he may have recognized the sincerity and 
high ideals of many scribes he seems to have been thor- 
oughly convinced of the hypocrisy of the scribal leaders 
in Jerusalem. They had earlier brought to Galilee the 
official opinion that the Power within him, which pro- 
duced such mighty results and which seemed to him so 
surely to be the sacred gift of God, was from hell (p. 118). 
Now in Jerusalem, when his sense of Messianic com- 
mission from God was so fully developed, he found them 
watching for a chance to kill him. In the honesty of his 
soul, he found now no place for any course except open 
and unsparing denunciation. In no other way could he 

*Mk. XII:38-40, Lk. XX:45-46. 


332 Tue Lire ann TEACHING oF J ESUS 


break up their ruinous influence over the nation and be 
loyal to his inner sense of commission by God as Mes- 
sianic leader of the people. He described their love of 
social recognition, their delight in parading through the 
markets dressed in their long cloaks, looking expectantly 
out of the corners of their eyes for respectful greetings. 
He described their apparently well known anxiety to se- 
cure prominent seats in the synagogue and the covert 
rivalry with which they maneuvred for the most honor- 
able places at dinner parties. Who could imagine prophets 
of God in these “last days” before the Judgment Day— 
Elijah or Jeremiah—solicitous about such distinctions! 
He spoke of the way in which they imposed upon widows, 
meaning either that they so impressed gullible rich widows 
by their long ostentatious praying as to secure from them 
rich gifts of houses which they eagerly gulped down 
(“devoured”) like greedy men at a feast; or that they 
mercilessly foreclosed mortgages on the houses of poor 
widows. ‘These extra pious men would receive an extra 
condemnation in the Judgment Day now so near at hand: 
“These shall receive the greater condemnation.” 

The Matthew Gospel, and Luke at an earlier point in 
the narrative, draw from Q an account of Jesus’ attack 
upon the Jerusalem scribes, much more detailed than that 
found in Mark.* The Matthew compiler adds (or Luke 
omits) some matter of peculiar interest to Jews.° The 
Matthew Gospel also represents Jesus to have applied the 
term “hypocrites” freely to the scribes while Luke avoids 
it entirely in the parallel passages. Indeed, in his entire 
Gospel, Luke rarely represents Jesus to have used this 
term. In the peculiar vehemence of the Matthew Gospel 
there is reflected the bitter strife that was going on be- 


‘Mt, XXII, Lk. XI:37-52. 
*Mt. XXIII:5, 7b-10, 15-22. 





SEE 


Jzsus DENOUNCES THE JERUSALEM Sorrpes 333 


tween the conservative, law-keeping Jewish Christians 
of Syria and the Jews of the synagogue, when this Gospel 
was being compiled. These conservative Jewish Chris- 
- tians were between two sets of offenders, the non-Christian 
Jewish leaders of the synagogue and the liberal Gentile 
Christians of the Pauline type. By way of warning to the 
latter class Jesus is represented as making the unusual 
statement that the teaching of the scribes ought to be 
followed because they are the official representatives of 
Moses, but that their example ought not to be followed 
because they do not practice what they teach: ‘Then 
spake Jesus to the multitudes and to his disciples, saying, 
On Moses’ seat have the scribes and Pharisees sat. All 
things therefore whatsoever they say to you, do and ob 
serve, but according to their works do not do for they 
say and do not.” | 

There is indication, too, that the report of Jesus’ teach- 
ing was at this point influenced by a desire to repress cer- 
tain undesirable tendencies that were beginning to appear 
among the conservative Syrian Christians themselves. 
They are warned against the habit of calling their teachers 
by the ostentatious title “Rabbi,” “Father,” “Master.” ® 
“Neither be ye called Masters, for one is your Master, 
even the Christ.” Jesus would hardly have spoken to the 
crowds in the temple in this way of the Christ, when the 
Christ had not yet appeared. Jesus was at the time still 
concealing his Messianic consciousness from _ the 
public. 

The main counts in Jesus’ terrific attack upon the Jeru- 
salem scribes according to the Matthew report are these: * 
They take the joy out of religion. They so apply the law 
of Moses to the daily life of conscientious men and women 


*Mt. XXIITI:8-10. 
*XXITII: 4-39. 


334 Tuer Large anp TRAcHIING OF JESUS 


as to make life a painful burden: “they tie heavy bur- 
dens on the shoulders of men,” while they themselves sit 
back in comfortable ease watching them stagger along and 
enjoying the consciousness of being hard taskmasters. To 
be set over others gives them satisfaction! They stand 
outside the gateway of the Kingdom of God, dignified, 
self-appointed gate keepers, refusing to have the humble 
spirit really necessary for their own entrance and lock- 
ing the gate against others who could easily be made ready 
to enter. They make expensive journeys by land and sea 
as missionaries of Pharisaic Judaism to gain an occasional 
convert from among the Gentiles, but the poor convert, 
when won, is “twofold more a son of hell” than the mis- 
sionary who converted him. These alleged religious guides 
are keen to make queer and unreasonable distinctions be- 
tween various forms of vows, and to measure out with 
eager exactness the sacred tenth of the smallest garden 
seeds, but they are utterly obtuse in transactions that 
eall for the fair play (‘justice’), “mercy” and wholesome 
“faith” in God and man, out of which spring all true life 
and religion. They are ostentatiously conscientious in 
trivial matters and grossly slack in fundamentals. They 
anxiously strain out of the liquid in the cup the minute 
insect that might be “unclean” food, but they gulp down 
a camel without a quiver! They care only for appear- 
ances ; they are like dishes carefully polished on the outside 
but disgustingly dirty on the inside. With their long 
prayers and malicious hearts they aré like grave chambers 
in the rock, carefully whitened outside but having within 
the stench of decaying corpses, the bones of the dead and 
all the “unclean” crawling life of the tomb. They hold 
up hands of pious horror over the conduct of their an- 
cestors who killed the great prophets, but in so doing they 
truly confess that they spring from a prophet-killing breed. 


Jesus Denounces THE JERUSALEM Sorises 335 


(Luke says that they complete the work of their fathers: 
their fathers did the killing, they do the burying.) ®* The 
groups of malicious scribes found in the synagogues and 
_temple courts now intent on murdering Jesus, are like 
broods of venomous snakes; they are destined soon to be 
in hell! The end of the age is near. Upon this last 
bloody generation, guilty of the supreme murder, will 
come vengeance for all the righteous blood shed from the 
time of Abel, the first murdered victim mentioned in scrip- 
ture, to Zechariah, the last recorded victim, murdered in 
the temple of God by officials of high standing.® 

This terrific polemic against the Jerusalem scribes 
breaks into a pathetic lament over the sullen, hard-hearted, 
wayward city that Jesus so loved. “O Jerusalem, Jeru- 
salem, which killeth the prophets and stoneth them that 
are sent unto her! How often would I have gathered thy 
children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens 
under her wings, and ye would not!” He had longed to 
get the people about him and bring to them the protecting, 
brooding love of God that he felt welling up within him- 
self. But now God’s holy house, befouled by its official 
keepers, must be abandoned by God to stand desolate until 
such time as the nation’s leaders should be of a different 
mind, ready to welcome one who should ‘come to them as 


®Lk. XI:47-48. 

° II Chron. XXIV:20-21. The Matthew Gospel differs from Luke in 
calling Zechariah “the son of Barachias.” In IT Chron. he is called 
“the gon of Jehoiada the priest.” Since II Chron., which records 
the murder of Zechariah, was the last book in the Hebrew Bible, 
this is like saying, “everything from Genesis to Revelation.” Ac- 
cording to Josephus, War, IV:5:4,-a man named Zechariah was 
killed in the year 67 or 68 A.D., “in the midst of the temple.” His 
father’s name, according to different manuscripts of Josephus, was 
“Bareis,” “Barouchos,” or “Bariskaios.” Perhaps the compiler of 
the Matthew Gospel had this in mind. It would not have seemed 
to him unfitting to attribute prophecy to Jesus. 


336 Tuer Lire peas TEACHING OF JESUS 


Jesus had now come, in the name and character of the 
Lord. 

Jesus’ terrific attack on the pompous, hypocritical great 
men of the temple and synagogue, which would be reported 
to their discredit all over the world by Passover pilgrims 
returning to their homes, was followed by a quiet scene in 
which he pointed out to his disciples an illustration of a 
genuinely religious spirit.1° Huis keen eye found it in the 
personality of a poor widow, perhaps one whose house had 
been “devoured” by greedy scribes. He saw her as he 
sat watching the rich Jews from all over the world bringing 
their offerings to the temple treasury. There was a long 
procession of them and they brought much. Some of them 
perhaps had their servants carry heavy bags of coin. 
Among many this lonely woman slipped up with two lepta, 
very small coins. Jesus learned, probably from conversa- 
tion with her, the amount of her gift and that it was all 
she had with which to provide food for herself for the day ; 
she lived from hand to mouth. He at once made the inci- 
dent the subject of a “teaching” to his disciples, whom 
he summoned from their strolling about in the colonnades 


near by. He said that in God’s sight she had given more . 


than all the rest put together. She had given all that 
she had. He who was about to give his all felt a strong 
bond of sympathy between himself and her. 


%” Mk, XII:41-44, Lk. XXI:1-4. 


_ Le 


CHAPTER XXXII 


JESUS’ PRIVATE TEACHING ABOUT THE DE- 
STRUCTION OF JEHOVAH’S HOUSE AND 
THE END OF THE AGE 


HE idea prevailed among at least a section of the 
earliest Palestinian Christians that Jehovah, prob- 
ably in some connection with his Messianic Judg- 

ment, would abandon his sacred house to utter destruction. 
It was understood that Jesus himself had expressed this 
expectation and had privately given some hints as to the 
time when this would happen.t In the earliest days any | 
Christians who held this expectation were sure to be ex- 
ceedingly unpopular. We shall see that the Great Court 
tried to secure the conviction of Jesus on the charge that 
he had threatened to destroy the temple, but failed to prove 
the charge.? Later the report that Stephen had been heard 
to say “that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place” 
resulted in his being lynched.* A covert assertion of this 
expectation was made by circulating the rumor that at 
the time of Jesus’ death the curtain screening off the most 
sacred room in the temple building had been torn almost 
in two. from the top down, that is, by the hand of God.‘ 
As the Christian movement grew stronger the expectation 
of the overthrow of Jehovah’s House was openly acknowl- 

1 Mk. XIII:3-4. 

*Mk, XIV :58-59. 


* Acts VI:13-14, VII:54-58. 
*Mk. XV:38. 


337 


338 Tus Lire anp Tracuine or JEsus 


edged and was definitely set, in the traditional teaching of 
Jesus. It appears in the Gospel narrative at the point to 
which we have now come. 

As Jesus was leaving the temple courts after his terrific 
attack upon the great men of the temple and the synagogue, 
the leading priests and the Jerusalem scribes, he remarked 
to “one of his disciples” (that is, “privately”), “Seest thou 
these great buildings? There shall not be left here one ~ 
stone upon another which shall not be thrown down.” 
When they had crossed the Kidron Valley, presumably on 
their way to their lodging place in Bethany, Jesus stopped 
on the Mount of Olives, overlooking the temple site across 
the valley, and talked “privately” with four of his disci- 
ples about the coming catastrophe. “And as he sat on 
the Mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and 
James and John and Andrew asked him privately, ‘Tell - 
us when shall these things be and what shall be the sign 
when these things are all about to be accomplished.’ ” ° 
Then follows the famous teaching recorded in Mk. XIII, 
Mt. XXIV, Lk. XXI: 25-36. Many of the ideas ex- 
pressed in this teaching, are those that are found in the 
Jewish apocalyptic literature of the time. The peculiar 
ideas that appear are such Christian adaptations of gen- 
eral Jewish apocalyptic as would spring naturally out of 
Jesus’ teaching about the nearness of the Kingdom and 
the assumption of his own Messiahship, together with the 
startling information that Jehovah’s house will be de- 
stroyed in connection with the Messianic Judg- 
ment.” 

5Mk, XIII:3-4. 

® Matthew records matter not found in Mark and considerable por- 
tions of this are assigned by Luke to an earlier period, e.g., Lk. 
XII:39-40, 42-46, XVII:23, 24, 26, 27, 34, 35, 37, XIX:13-26. 


™The theory that there is embedded in this discourse a little Jew- 
ish apocalypse which circulated independently and about which as 


Tracuine Asout THE Env or THE AcE 339 


The discourse, especially in its Matthew form, seems 
to assume a point of view prevalent later among the early 
Christians and not that of the Passover week to which it 
_ 1s assigned in the narrative. In the Matthew Gospel the 
disciples ask him, “What shall be the sign of thy coming 
and of the consummation of the age?’ This question 
seems to imply an understanding of the fact that he was 
to die, be raised from the dead, taken into the heavens, 
and then come from the heavens, although according to the 
subsequent narrative these things were not at all clear 
to them before Jesus’ death. In Mark’s Gospel, which 
often more nearly preserves the original situation, the in- 
dication of this later point of view is not quite so evident. 
In Mark they simply ask when the destruction of the 
temple, of which Jesus had spoken, would occur, although 
it is Jesus’ coming as Messianic Son of Man “in clouds” 
in accord with the later Christian expectation that con- 
stitutes the body of the discourse. It may be that the 
real viewpoint of the four disciples at the time was this: 
they did not yet understand that Jesus’ prediction of death 
and resurrection was to be taken literally instead of as a 
kind of parable or “dark saying” § (p. 238), but they were 
convinced that his Messianic demonstration would not be 
made immediately, as they had hoped. He was perhaps 
to withdraw again from public life for a time as he had 
done once before,® and then emerge from obscurity, this 
time clothed with the radiant form and power of the Son 
of Man from heaven. 

The main ideas presented in the beneath may be 
sketched in brief as these: The Messianic demonstration 


a nucleus certain Christian teachings were gathered, seems to have 
no constraining evidence in its favor. 

* Jn. XVI:25, 29. 

°Mk. VII:24, X:1. 


340 Tur Lirz ann Traonrna or Jesus 


is to be preceded by a period of extreme suffering,!° during 
which many spurious Messiahs will try to start Messianic 
movements. ‘They will appear in the wilderness remote 
from police inspection, or will be found secretly plotting 
revolutionary movements in inner chambers. No such 
definitely localized centres of Messianic agitation need 
attract the serious attention of the disciples. Such phe- 
nomena could accompany only a Messianic movement of 
the Son of David type which Jesus had rejected. He had 
cast his lot in with the Spirit of the Son of Man, the 
signs of whose coming were to be sought in the heavens 
and not on the earth. It would not be secret but open 
to every one’s eyes, like the lightning flash or the hungry 
eagles flying swiftly from every quarter of the sky to a 
common destination for food.14_ Wars will be heard of 
in various parts of the world, and earthquakes and fam- 
ines; it will be a period of general upheaval and insecurity. 
These sufferings are merely preliminary to worse suffer- 
ing; they are the beginning of birth pains. Christians 
will be killed. They will even turn against each other in 
hate. False leaders will arise among them. A deadly 
apathy will come over many of them. During this pre- 
liminary period the gospel will be preached over the 
world. (This would not require any very long time.)*? 
An especially terrible and culminating incident in this 
period of suffering will be something that is to take place 
in Judea, evidently the desolating of Jehovah’s House. 
A sign of this will be “the desolation-producing abomina- © 
tion standing where he ought not” (Mk.), something 

Mk. XIII:5-23, Mt. XXIV:4-28, Lk. XXI1:7-24. 

“Mt. XXIV:26-28. 

Paul a few years later felt that as soon as he had done one 
more piece of evangelistic work on the western edge of the world, 


in Spain, the evangelization of the world would be complete, Rom. 
XV:18-19, 23-28, of. X:18. 


Tracuine Asout THE Enp or THE Acar 3841 


“spoken of through the prophet Daniel, standing in a holy 
place” (Mt.). The early Christians had evidently come to 
a secret understanding as to what this ‘desolation- 
__ producing abomination” was,—“let him that readeth un- 
derstand,” that is, “we Christians know what this means.” 
What it was is uncertain.’® The phrase “standing where 
he (Mk.), or it (Mt.), ought not,” might indicate a statue 
of aman. When this sign shall appear the Christian men 
in Judea are instantly to drop everything and flee with 
their families “unto the mountains,” where there will pre- 
sumably be caves and other hiding places. It is to be 
hoped that the necessity of this flight will not occur in 
winter, when streams swollen by winter rains would make 
travel difficult, nor on a Sabbath (Mt. with characteristic 
regard for law), when it would be difficult to hire ani- 
mals for the swift transportation of household goods and 
families. 

Luke, who pictures no “private” conversation of Jesus 
with his disciples, and who has nothing corresponding to 
“let him that readeth understand,” says simply, “when ye 
see Jerusalem compassed with armies then know that her 
desolation is at hand.” From his Gentile viewpoint there 
is to be “distress upon the land and wrath unto this peo- 
ple.” This distress will consist in the fact that “they shall 
fall by the edge of the sword and shall be led captive into 
all the nations; and Jerusalem shall be trodden down by 
the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.” 14 


“4 Eusebius, the church historian and.librarian who lived in Pales- 
tinian Cesarea in the fourth century, had some reason for believing 
that the Jerusalem Christians, in obedience to a revelation made to 
approved men there “before the war,” left the city and settled in 
Pella east of the Jordan, Ch. Hist., II1:5, 3. 

47k. XXI:20-24.. Paul felt that the time for the fulness of the 
Gentiles to be brought in might be completed in his own lifetime, 
Rom. X1:25, XIII:11-12. 


342 Tur Lirzt anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


After this preliminary period of distress, which appar- 
ently culminates in the destruction of Jehovah’s House, 
the great event, the Coming of the Son of Man, will take 
., place.*® It will occur “immediately after the tribulation © 

of those days” (Mt.), “in those days after that tribulation” — 

_ (Mk.). It will be heralded by the portents commonly — 

described in Jewish literature in connection with Jeho- 
vah’s Judgment, the dislodging of the stars and the terrify- 
ing of their animating spirits. Then at the signal of 
a trumpet blast the angels of the Son of Man will go 
over the earth to assemble “the elect.” What becomes 
of those so assembled and what becomes of those who are 
left, is not stated. It seems to be assumed that every one 
will be familiar with current ideas on this point. The 
Matthew Gospel, as we shall see later, presents a more 
detailed idealized picture of the Judgment scene.*® 

All these things are to happen within the lifetime of the 
generation to which Jesus belonged. Heaven and earth 
will pass away, will become a new heaven and a new 
earth with the dawning of the New Age, but Jesus’ words 
will not fail. However, the exact date within the genera- 
tion is known to no one, not even the angels of heaven 
nor Jesus himself. It is the Father’s secret: “Verily I 
say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all 
these things happen. The heaven and the earth shall 
pass away: but my words shall not pass away. But of 
that day or hour knoweth no man, not the angels which 
are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.” Whether 
we have here Jesus’ own thought or the thought attributed 
to him, as a matter of course, by his disciples later, is a 
question which has already been discussed (ch. xxxili). 

The discourse in Mark ends with a solemn injunction 


* Mt. XXIV:29-44, Mk. XIII:24-37, Lk, XXI:25-36, 
#* Mt. XXV:31-46, 


Tracuinae Asout THE END or THE AGE 343 


to the four listeners, and through them to all the disciples, 
to watch. Special obligation to watch rests upon the four, 
who are like the gate-keeper of an absent householder. 
“Tt is as when a man sojourning in another country, hay- 
- ing left his house and given authority to his servants, 
to each one his work, commanded also the porter to watch. 
Watch, therefore, for ye know not when the lord of the 
house cometh, whether at even or at midnight, or at cock- 
crowing or in the morning; lest coming suddenly he find 
you sleeping. And what I say unto you, I say unto all, 
Watch.” 37 

In the Matthew Gospel there follows a paragraph ** not 
found elsewhere, the parable of the virgins, containing a 
dramatic warning to apathetic and careless disciples, par- 
ticularly those holding positions of leadership. In the 
Matthew Gospel, more than elsewhere, there have appeared 
denunciatory references to spurious Christians, especially 
teachers and ‘prophets, lax in their observance of the law, 
whose counterfeit characters are to be revealed in the 
Judgment Day.?® In the words just preceding this para- 
ble such faithless leaders have been represented by ‘the 
character of a drunken head servant who abused the privi- 
leges of his position and was consequently excluded from 
the Kingdom. He went to the abode of the wicked, de- 
scribed in the language of current Jewish literature as 
the place of “the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.” ?° 
The parable of the virgins also describes persons specially 
trusted with the responsibility of watching for the arrival 
of the bridegroom. They had gone out in the early evening 
to some designated spot to meet him, expecting to join 


Mk. XITII:34-37. 

#XXV :1-13. 

#V:19, VIT:15-23, XIII:41, XXII:11-14, XXIV:10-12. 

* XXIV :45-51; of. Secrets of Enoch XL:12, the “weeping hell.” 


844 Tue Lire anp TEACHING or JESUS 


him there and proceed with him to the place where the © 
wedding feast would be held. They all prepared to per-- 
form this function, but half of them made insufficient 
preparation. They did not provide enough lamp oil to 
last through the unexpectedly long interval before the — 
bridegroom’s delayed arrival. He finally arrived at mid- — 
night when they were all asleep. Those with no reserve 
oil found their lamps going out, They tried to make good — 
their neglect, but it was too late to do so and they were 
consequently shut out from the wedding supper. 

This parable fits well into the situation that existed in 
the first decades of the Christian movement when the keen 
expectation of an immediate return of Jesus from heaven 
was losing its edge and Christians were becoming apa- 
thetic. Was this parable the work of alert Christian 
evangelists during this period who were sure that Jesus 
had foreseen its needs and would approve of such teach- — 
ing as this parable presents? How clearly did Jesus fore- 
see all the development of the Christian movement that 
took place in the early decades and in all the succeeding 
centuries after his death? In any case, from the stand- 
point of either the evangelists or Jesus, what was it that 
the insufficiently prepared really lacked? The picture 
of the Judgment scene presented in the last paragraph 
of this chapter, emphasizes neighbor love as the one thing 
requisite. From the viewpoint of .the Matthew Gospel 
Jesus regarded neighbor love as involving, and not dis- 
placi ng, obligation to keep all the other commandments. 
It is one of the two commandments on which “the whole 
law hangs.” 34 

Still as a part of Jesus’ “private” teaching to his disci- 
ples the Matthew Gospel next introduces the parable of 
“The Talents,” or better, of “The Estate Held in 

™Mt. XXII:40. 


Traouina: Anovt THE Enp or tHE Agr 345 


Trust.” 22. It is another illustration showing the way in 
which disciples could successfully prepare themselves for 
the impending Messianic Judgment, the point at which 
there was special danger of failure and the sure conse- 
quence of such failure. As in the preceding parable of 
the virgins so here the idea of a delayed coming is em- 
phasized. ‘The owner of the estate came back “after a 
long time,” just as the bridegroom did not arrive until 
midnight, long after he had been expected to come. 

A man who was going abroad converted his estate (“his 
goods”) into cash and left it in trust to three of his ser- 
vants for investment. He gave five eighths to one, two 
eighths to another, and one eighth to a third. He made 
this unequal division as a result of his estimate of each 
servant's business ability (v. 15). The first two invested 
the amounts entrusted to them so successfully that when 
they were “after a long time” called to account, their em- 
ployer’s trust was found to have doubled. .He congratulated 
them heartily, promoted them to positions of greater re- 
sponsibility and power, and took them into a kind of 
partnership with himself in what is called his “joy”: 
“Enter thou into the joy of thy lord.” Perhaps the phrase- 
ology of the application, the joy of life in the Messianic 
age, is at this point used in the parable itself. 

‘The third trustee made no investment with his trust. 
He simply put it in the poor man’s popular place of safety 
deposit; “he digged in the earth and hid his lord’s money.” 
When he was called upon for an accounting he made a 
rather ill-natured, sullen defense of his conduct. His lord 
was a rough man, always expecting to reap harvests that 
other men had produced. He had been afraid to do busi- 
ness for such a man; he had feared that he might lose 
what had been entrusted to him. So he had done no 

™Mt. XXIV:3, XXV:14-30, of. Lk. XIX:12-27. 


846 Tue Lire anp Tracuinae or JzEsus 


business at all. He was returning the capital without any 
interest. His lord called him a “wicked and lazy servant.” 
His “wickedness” perhaps consisted in pride. His pride 
was hurt because his business ability had been considered 
less than that of his associates. He would not do what he 
could with what he had, because others had more. But 
he was also lazy. It was too much trouble to do business 
for his lord. His fundamental defect was lack of interest 
in his lord’s business. He did not care if his lord’s estate 
did not iticrease. His laziness was merely a symptom of 
an anemic good will toward his lord and his lord’s busi- 
ness. He was relegated to the place of idleness, “the 
outer darkness,” in the language of current Jewish litera- 
ture. ~The amount entrusted to him for investment was — 
then transferred to the man who had demonstrated his 
ability to handle the largest share of the estate. The 
_ estate must be developed and the opportunity to do this 
must be given to the man who could and would use the 
opportunity. In time of famine, when the government 
is distributing seed to farmers, the little seed that he has — 
received must be taken away from the small farmer who 
will not sow it, and given to the large farmer who will, 
for a harvest must be produced. It is a case of either 
“use or lose.” 

Here again the question arises, what, in the mind of 
Jesus, was the meaning of this “parable” in terms of 
actual life? What was it that was given to these disciples 
of Jesus that was. capable of being increased, for the in- 
crease of which they were held responsible, with expecta- 
tion of larger opportunity if they succeeded and of ruin 
if they became lax and lazy? Here again, as in the parable 
of the virgins, the Judgment scene described in the next 
paragraph suggests the answer. It is neighbor love, 
friendliness in the simple relations of plain daily life, 


Tracuinc Asour THE END oF THE AGE 347 


that enables men to pass through the Messianic Judgment 
into the eternal life and light of the New Age. The com- 
piler of the Matthew Gospel very probably thought of this 
_ parable as particularly applicable to the inner circle of 
disciples to whom the Gospel represents Jesus to have 
given it as private teaching.?? It would have seemed, 
therefore, specially applicable to all evangelists and proph- 
ets of the Gospel-making period. They must not lose their 
confidence in the return of the Son of Man from heaven, 
and they must do their utmost to develop in quantity and 
quality the body of those who with simple, nhostenta vious 
good will awaited his coming. 

This private teaching closes with an idealized picture 
of the Son of Man’s Judgment.** In its opening sentence 
and in its description of the fate of the rejected it is very 
like current Jewish apocalyptic literature, especially the 
Book of Enoch, which was popular among Christians.?® 


“And he sat on the throne of his glory 
And the sum of judgment was given unto the Son of Man, 
And he caused the sinners to pass away and be destroyed from 
off the face of the earth.” 


“And he will deliver them to the angels for punishment 
To execute vengeance upon them because they have oppressed 
His children and His elect.” 


“And the righteous and elect shall be saved on that day 
And they shall never thenceforward see the face of the sinners 
and the unrighteous 
And the Lord of Spirits will abide over them, 
And with that Son of Man shall they eat 
And lie down and rise up forever and ever.” ” 
2 XXIV :3. 
“Mt. XXV:31-46. 
*In Jude 14 it is referred to by name and certain of its state- 


ments regarding the judgment of the wicked are quoted. 
*En. LXIX:27, LXII:11, 13-14. 


348 Tue Lire anp TERAOHING oF JESUS 


In the Matthew picture the Son of Man has emptied 
all the heavens of all the hosts of his angels and has 
them assembled in majestic array about his glorious throne 
in the clouds. Below on the earth the terrified nations have 
been gathered. Then the line of separation is drawn as a 
shepherd separates his white sheep from a dark and sin- 
ister herd of goats. That which distinguishes the true 
disciple from the false is what Jesus had always in all 
his teaching been urging upon those who would prepare 
for the coming Kingdom, namely, sincere, dependable 
friendliness in all the commonplace relations of daily life, 
loving one’s neighbor as himself. The teaching repre- 
sents plain daily life, with its ample opportunity for 
_ the exchange of ordinary neighborly kindliness, as a situ- 
ation devised by God in which to fasten upon men the 
habits and disposition necessary for participation in the 
activities of the eternal life of the Age to Come.?* The 
Kingdom of God is a democracy in which “the King” calls 
his true subjects his “brothers” and identifies himself with 
the least and neediest of them. Of course, no one of them, 
either good or bad, remembered ever meeting the Son of 
Man, a glorious radiant being out of the heavens, sick or 
hungry or in prison. Nevertheless such a being had stood 
in close relation with the human suffering which they had 
either relieved or ignored. “Verily I say unto you 
inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brothers, even 
these least, ye did it unto me.” 


“Tt is sometimes supposed that this paragraph pictures the Judg- 
ment of Gentiles that had never heard the Gospel. If a Judgment 
scene in which neither Jews nor Christians appear had been in the 
mind of the compiler of the Gospel he would have made that inter- 
pretation more evident. Unevangelized Gentiles have not appeared 
in the preceding parts of the teaching. The only reference to Gen- 
tiles has been the statement that the Gospel is to be preached in all 
the world. 


CHAPTER XXXIII 
THE TREACHERY OF A TABLE COMPANION 


| HE priests and scribes grew desperate under Jesus’ 
public attacks upon them at the temple before the 
multitudes of Passover pilgrims that were filling 

up the city. They felt that he might be tempted by his 
popularity to take advantage of the presence of these mul- 
titudes and head a revolutionary Messianic movement dur- 
ing the Passover week. Even if he should not do this, 
but should be content with his present self-assumed réle 
of prophet, priestly and scribal prestige throughout the 
nation and all the ghettos of foreign countries would be 
seriously impaired if the thousands of pilgrims should 
go home reporting that Jesus’ fierce attacks had gone un- 
punished. It seemed necessary to do something decisive 
at once. There were only two days left in which to act, 
for after the Passover week had begun so many of his 
friends, especially Galileans, would have arrived that it 
would be unsafe to proceed against him. Even in these 
two remaining days no open measures could be safely 
taken against him: “Now after two days was the feast 
of the Passover and the unleavened bread; and the chief 
priests and the scribes sought how they might take him 
with subtlety, and kill him: for they said, Not during 
the feast lest haply there shall be a tumult of the people.” * 


1Mk. XIV:1-2. 
349 


350 Tur Lire anp Tracuine or Jzsus 


In the carrying out of any plot the priests and scribes 
greatly needed the help of someone among the inner 
circle of Jesus’ friends. They needed the services of some- 
one who would take him on some pretext to a pre-arranged 
place where they could seize him, and who would then 
return to his friends with some plausible explanation of 
his absence. Just at this juncture they were secretly 
visited by a man from the inner circle of Jesus’ friends, 
Judas, one of the ‘Twelve, who offered to deliver Jesus into 
their power. They naturally gave him a hearty welcome 
and promised to pay him well.? 

We can only imagine how Judas’ mind worked in the 
process of reaching this determination. The order of 
arrangement of the narrative in the Gospel of Mark affords 
a hint. Between the statement that the priests were plot- 
ting against Jesus (XIV: 1-2) and the account of Judas’ 
visit to the priests (vs. 10-12), occurs the account of a 
dinner party in Bethany, the suburb in which Jesus and 
the Twelve had found lodgings.* This peculiar arrange- 
ment of the narrative indicates that the compiler saw some 
connection betwéen Judas’ treachery and what took place 
at this dinner party. While they were at the table a 
woman brought in a sealed alabaster vase of very expen- 
sive liquid perfume.* Instead of unsealing the vase she 
broke it, apparently intending to prevent its ever being 
used again for any common purpose, and poured the liquid 
over Jesus’ head. The extreme value of the perfume used 
for this anointing and the fact that she broke the vase, 


1 The Matthew Gospel, perhaps influenced by Zech. XI:12-13, names 
the price, thirty pieces of silver. If a “piece of silver” was four 
denarii, thirty pieces would have been about 120 days’ wages (Mt. 
XX :2). 

*Mk. XI:11, 19. 

*Its cost was estimated as equal to 300 days’ wages. Mk. 
XIV:5; of. Mt. XX:2. 


TREACHERY OF A TABLE COMPANION 351 


indicate that she intended by this action to express the 
hope that Jesus would this week declare himself to be the 
Messiah, “The Anointed,’ and inaugurate a Messianic 
- movement. 

-~Some of those present (Mt. “‘the disciples’) became 
very indignant at this proceeding. If they recognized the 
delicate suggestion of her act they perhaps felt that it 
was not a woman’s business to be meddling with politics. 
Any such suggestion might far better come from them. In 
any case they objected to her absurdly expensive way of 
making the suggestion. They felt sure that Jesus would 
be displeased with such a use of money. They had re- 
peatedly heard him say that money ought to be given to 
the poor. They had recently seen him turn away a very 
attractive applicant for discipleship because the man would 
not make this use of money (p. 283). But to their sur- 
prise Jesus called her act a “noble deed.” He did not 
relax his habitual concern for the poor. “You have the 
poor always with you and whensoever you will you can 
do good to them.” But in the present crisis another mo- 
tive ought to prevail. It was a time to show loyal affec- 
tion to himself. In the city powerful men were shrewdly 
plotting his execution. Dissatisfaction and resentment 
were growing in the heart of one of his table companions. 
At such a time the one great and noble thing to do was 
to express unswerving loyalty to his person. At a later 
time when men should look back upon this great crisis 
in God’s On-coming Kingdom with true apprehension of 
its meaning, her deed would everywhere seem memorable. 
“Verily I say to you wherever the gospel shall be preached 
in all the world also that which this woman has done shall 
be spoken of in her memory.” The disciples had been 
willing to invest their money in the poor as a means of 
gaining remunerative offices in the New Age. “Lo we 


352 Tuer Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


have left all and followed thee; what then shall we have?’ © 
This woman had nothing of the sort to gain by Jesus’ 
elevation to power; she simply loved her Lord and wished 
to see him honored. 7 

Another outstanding feature of the incident was Jesus’ 
consciousness of the nearness of his Messianic death. 
Everything that he saw reminded him of it. This glad 
pouring of the perfume on his person was, to his mind, 
the beginning of his preparation for burial. They will 
soon in sadness be wrapping sweet smelling spices in his 
grave clothes and drenching them with liquid perfume. 
This scene to him is prophetic of an immediate entomb- 
ment rather than an enthronement. 

All this was extremely offensive to Judas. It was the 
last straw in the growing burden of Jesus’ offensiveness 
to him (p. 220). It was clear to him that Jesus was not 
equal to the crisis which his reckless harangues at the 
temple had produced. In spite of his bold words he was 
nothing but a queer sentimentalist, fond of extravagant 
attention from women, ready to tend babies, full of weak 
foreboding in the face of danger, unequal to the ad- 
ministration of a great world empire. Especially Jesus’ 
idea that there was no place for rich men in the Coming 
Kingdom had offended Judas. He bitterly resented the 
loss of the time he had spent with Jesus. He had during 
all these months been kept from business and money mak- 
ing by the hope which he now considers to be baseless. 
According to the Gospel of John he was custodian of the 
meager funds available for meeting the expenses of the 
Twelve ® and, therefore, may have looked forward to being 
Treasurer of the Realm in the New Age. He may often 
have pictured to himself Isaiah’s vision of long proces- 


5Mt. XIX:27. 
Jn. XII:6, XIII:29. 


TREACHERY OF A TABLE CoMPANION 353 


sions of dromedaries loaded with treasures, and great fleets 
of ships carrying multitudes of Jewish passengers, “their 
silver and their gold with them,” all hurrying to him, 
_ dJehovah’s Treasurer, in Jerusalem, the world’s capital.? 
All this now seems to him to have been an idle dream. 
He will reimburse himself as far as he can and cut loose 
from the foolish movement. It may be that he did not 
expect that his action would really lead to Jesus’ death. 
Jesus’ popularity, which made it seem to the priests and 
scribes so difficult to dispose of him, would naturally have 
seemed to Judas likely to open for Jesus some way of 
escape. According to the Matthew Gospel, when Judas 
later became convinced that this was not to be the case he 
bitterly regretted his action. He made an unsuccessful 
effort to return his blood money to the priests, and then 
in desperation apparently broke into the sacred enclosure 
and threw it into the very temple building itself, as if 
calling God to witness that he had not kept the money. 
He then went out and hanged himself. In the Gospel- 
making period a field near. Jerusalem, called the “Blood 
Field,’ was popularly associated in two traditions with 
the death of Judas. Judas’ regret may have been occa- 
sioned not only by his certainty that Jesus was a good 
man, but by the fact that he found himself to be no patri- 
otic hero in the eyes of the priests! He was to them simply 
a contemptible man who had betrayed a table companion 
for money. 

The enemies of Jesus must have rejoiced at the pros- 
pect of getting Jesus into their possession in this particular 
way, through a table companion. They were likely to 
be very unpopular after they had secured the death of so 
popular a prophet. But now the people would feel sure 


"Is. LX:4-9. 
*Mt. XXVII:3-10, Acts I1:18-19. 


354 Tue Lire anp Tracuina or JEsus 


that Jesus must have been guilty of some outrageous 
misconduct which the priests and scribes had fortunately 
discovered, something so bad that even a table companion 
had felt obliged to turn against him! 


CHAPTER XXXIV 


JESUS’ LAST SUPPER WITH THE TWELVE 


meal with his twelve table companions was the 
annual Passover supper eaten once a year by many 
thousands of pilgrims who came from all over the world to 
Jerusalem for this purpose. It was a joyful feast eaten 
in the early part of the night by groups of from ten to — 
twenty ? to commemorate the nation’s flight in the night 
when God delivered them from Egyptian bondage. The 
menu of the feast, as nearly as can be ascertained from 
general biblical allusions to it? and from detailed post- 
biblical descriptions of it in the Talmud,* was very simple 
and dramatically symbolic. It consisted of “unleavened”’ 
bread suggestive of the traditional hurried exit from Egypt 
when there had been no time to use yeast in the baking; 
a lamb roasted whole without breaking a bone or cutting 
. off the head, bringing to mind the lamb’s blood sprinkled 
on the door-case of each faithful Hebrew family on the 
night of the great exodus when God “passed over” the 
blood sprinkled houses and did not stop as elsewhere to 
deal out death to any luckless first born. In addition to 
these two principal articles of food there were four cups 
of wine for each person; salty water to be used with a 
variety of bitter herbs such as usually constituted an ap- 
* Jos. War V1:9:3. 


* Especially Ex, XI:4-XIII:16. 
* Talmud, Tract Pesachim (Passover). 


855 


A CCORDING to the first three Gospels Jesus’ last 


356 Tuer Lire ann TEACHING or JESUS 


petizing side dish;* and a pasty mixture of crushed 
fruits and vinegar flavored with spices, thought to be sug-. 
gestive of the clay used by the Hebrew bondmen in their 
brick making.® Into this dish morsels of food were dipped. 
At certain times during the meal the cups of wine were 
drunk; there were various prayers of thanksgiving 
and blessing, a recital of parts of the national history 
before and after the great exodus and the chanting at dif- 
ferent times of parts of Psalms 113 to 118 and 136.° 

In the early part of the day Jesus commissioned two of 
his disciples (Peter and John, Lk.) to make preparation 
for the supper. They had first to secure a suitable room. © 
According to the Matthew Gospel Jesus was counting on 
a certain friend in the city to furnish a room. “And he 
said, Go to the city to So and So and say to him, the 
Teacher says, My time is near; at your house I keep the - 
Passover with my disciples.”* According to Mark’s 
Gospel the process by which the room was secured was 
more mysterious and is perhaps, though not necessarily, 
represented to have involved supernatural insight on the 
part of Jesus. The two disciples were told that in the 
city they would meet a man carrying a water jar, ap- 
parently a somewhat unusual sight. They were to follow 
him home and say to his master that “the Teacher” wished 
to engage a room in the house. It is implied that the 


*G. E. Post, Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. I, p. 304. 
Sometimes thought to be suggestive of bitter bondage, e.g., Oesterley 
and Box, Religion and Worship of the Synagogue, p. 359. Rabbi 
Jonathan said, “Why are the Egyptians compared to bitter herbs? 
Because as the bitter herbs are first soft and then hard, so were 
also the Egyptians; at first they treated the Israelites with kindness 
and afterwards with harshness?” Tract Pesachim, ch. II. 

5 Wiinsche, Neue Beitrége eur Erlduterung der Evangelien. 

*See Art. “Passover,” H. D. B., and Dictionary of Christ and 
the Gospels. 

"Mt. XXVI°:18. 


Last SupPER WITH THE TWELVE 357 


householder was acquainted with “the Teacher.” Jesus 
seems to have intended, either by previous arrangement 
with this householder or through supernatural insight, to 
keep all but two of the disciples in ignorance of the place 
where the supper was to be eaten. It will appear later 
that Jesus knew something about Judas’ treachery and did 
not propose to let the temple police find out through the 
traitor where he might be found and arrested before the 
supper was ended. For some reason he especially desired 
to eat this supper with his disciples. “I have greatly 
desired to eat this Passover with you before my suffering,” 
he said to them that evening at the table.® 

The preparations for the supper, so far as they were 
not made by the householder himself, involved chiefly se- 
curing a lamb that would pass the epee of the temple 
authorities, getting it properly killed at the temple,® and 
roasted. Thousands of lambs were killed early enough 
in the afternoon, after the regular daily sacrifice, to allow 
time for roasting. Jesus’ two disciples would have been 
busy during most of the day making these preparations, 

Toward evening the two men reported to Jesus that 
everything was in readiness for the supper and the eleven 
men (perhaps also a few others) were conducted by the 
two guides to the house. Three unusual features char- 
acterized the supper: Jesus discussed the terrible treachery 
of a table companion; he spoke with dramatic impressive- 
ness about his death in two acted parables, the parables of 
the Broken Bread and the Red Wine Poured Out; and he 
took a solemn pledge never to drink wine again until they 
should meet at the Messianic banquet in God’s New Age. 

The natural joy of the occasion disappeared when Jesus 
assured them that one of their own circle, bound to him 


*Lk. XXII: 15. 
*Tract Pesachim, Ch. V. Art. Passover, H DB and HDCG, 


358 Tue Lire anp Tracuine or JESus 


by the sacred ties of table companionship, would put him 
into the hands of his powerful enemies. Someone who 
then and there was dipping his morsel of bread and herbs 
into the same dish of sauce with Jesus would do the dread- 
ful deed. If there were on the table more than one dish 
this specification narrowed the possibilities to a small — 
number in the immediate vicinity of Jesus. According 
to the Matthew Gospel Judas was seated so near to Jesus 
that when everyone began to say “Surely not I, Lord?” 
he could ask the same question and receive from Jesus an 
affirmative reply not overheard by the others. Jesus’ 
strong words about the terrible character of the act, “good 
were it for that man if he had not been born,” were a 
powerful final appeal to Judas not to do the dastardly 
deed. 

At some point in the meal Jesus, his mind charged with 
the thought of his death as it had been at the social supper 
lately given in his honor in Simon’s home (p. 352), took a 
cake, or wafer, of unleavened bread, asked God’s blessing 
upon it, solemnly broke it into pieces which he gave to 
them, saying as he did so that the pieces were his “body.” 
This saying, like many of his parables, was hard for them 
to understand. How came he to be speaking of his 
“body”? The paschal lamb was before them on the table, 
or, if he was speaking at a later stage in the supper, the 
pieces of the lamb were there. The disciples might, there- 
fore, have naturally thought of his body, so soon to be 
lifeless, as a sort of paschal sacrifice offered on the 
threshold of the New Age of Messianic liberty as the 
paschal lambs had originally been killed on the threshold 
of national freedom from Egyptian bondage. The 
emergence of “many” into God given liberty (cf. Mk. 
X:45) as the result of his Messianic death was to be the 
thought uppermost in their minds as they ate together, 


Last SuprpEerR wItH THE TWELVE 359 


After his solemn words about the broken bread he took a 
cup of wine and, again after prayer, gave it to them to 
drink, saying as he did so that it was “covenant blood.” 
This covenant would naturally be understood to be the 
- “new” covenant (so Lk: and many readings of Mt.), 
for the Messiah’s ‘““New Age” was the time when the 
““New Covenant” would be made. The Old Covenant was 
the one made by Jehovah and his people at the foot of 
Mt. Sinai when the people covenanted to keep Jehovah’s 
law and he promised by implication to bless them.1° A 
covenant was made binding by the application of blood to 
the contracting parties. At Mt. Sinai part of the blood of 
the slaughtered oxen was put on the altar representing 
Jehovah, and the rest on the people. In the present situa- 
tion Jesus speaks of his death, symbolized by the blood- 
like red wine poured out in the cup, as something that 
binds men and God together in a New Covenant, one in 
which men promise loyal hearty obedience to God and his 
Messiah, and God promises the blessing of his forgive- 
ness and of his continual presence and spiritual help. In 
the New Age with its new heaven and new earth God will 
tabernacle with his people, wipe their tear stained faces 
and bring them tender comfort. The picture that was 
suggested to the minds of Jesus and his disciples by this 
mention of the New Covenant was that which we have in 
the Revelation: “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth; 
for the first heaven and the first earth are passed away. 
4 Behold the tabernacle of God is with men, and he 
shall dwell with them and they shall be his peoples, and 
God himself shall be with them, and be their God; and he 
shall wipe away every tear from their eyes; and death 
shall be no more, neither shall there.be mourning nor 
crying nor pain any more; the first things (the things of 
* Ex. XXIV:1-8, 


360 Tur Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


the present age) are passed away.” 74 As these young — 
Jews on Passover night listened to Jesus, they would in- — 
stinctively have thought of the prophet’s famous predic- 
tion of the New Covenant: “Behold the days come saith — 
Jehovah when I will make a new covenant with the house — 
of Israel and with the house of Judah; not according to — 
the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day — 
that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land © 
of Egypt... . But this is the covenant that I will make © 
with the house of Israel after those days saith Jehovah: 
I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart — 
will I write it; and I will be their God and they shall be | 
my people. And they shall teach no more every man his — 
neighbor and every man his brother, saying, Know Je- — 
hovah; for they shall all know me from the least of them — 
to the greatest of them, saith Jehovah, for I will forgive 
their iniquity and their sin will I remember no more.” *? — 
It was with an intense expectation of such an Age, soon 
to dawn upon the world, that the hearts of these religious — 
patriots in the upper room were thrilled by the words of 
Jesus about the New Covenant. We men of the modern ~ 
western world, who do not have their Jewish pre-supposi- 
tions, find it difficult to put ourselves in their places and — 
feel the excitement of the occasion. Nothing was said by — 
Jesus about the way in which his death would serve to 
bring God and men together in close covenant relationship. — 
The disciples had not yet accepted the expectation of his 
literal death, and were of course not able to think about 
its meaning. A germ idea was presented in parable form 
and men have been left to interpret the solemn parables 
in the light of developing Christian experience. 


™ Rev. XXI:1, 3-4. Of. Ps. of Solomon XVII:23-38. 
“Jer. XXX1:31-34, 


Last Suprrr witH THE TWELVE 361 


The third peculiar feature of the occasion was Jesus’ 
solemn pledge that he would never drink wine again until 
the company should re-assemble at the victorious Mes- 
_sianic banquet when they would drink it “new” in the. 
“New Age,” when all things should become new.** Jesus 
was able to look across his dark death now so near and 
see the light of the New Age which he felt sure his death 
would introduce. The Luke Gospel, in the text as we 
have it, represents Jesus to have been handed a cup of 
wine sometime before he spoke the parables of the Bread 
and the Red Wine, and with this cup in hand, to have made 
the solemn vow of an abstinence that began at once. He 
did not drink any of this cup himself nor presumably did 
he later drink the cup which symbolized the poured out 
blood. ‘And he received a cup and when he had given 
thanks he said, Take this and divide it among yourselves, 
for I say unto you, I shall not drink from henceforth of 
the fruit of the vine until the Kingdom of God shall 
come.” ?* Then follow later the parables in action of the 
‘Broken Bread and the Red Wine Poured Out. 

There is no evidence in Mt. and Mk. that Jesus meant 
this cereniony to be repeated and some manuscripts of Lk. 
omit the words, “This do in remembrance of me.” In 
Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthian Christians, written 
some twenty-five years later, and a considerable time before 
our Gospels in their present form came into existence, 
he states that he had “received from the Lord” an ac- 
count of the original Lord’s Supper according to which the 
future celebration of the Supper was distinctly com- 
manded by Jesus: “For I received of the Lord that which 


* Of. Rom. VIII:18-25. 
“Lk. XXII:17-18. There are several interesting questions of 
textual criticism that cannot be discussed here. 


362 Tue Lirz anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus in the night 
in which he was betrayed took bread; and when he had 
given thanks he broke it, and said, This is my body which 
is for you: this do in remembrance of me.” ** If Paul 
“received” this “from the Lord” through the early Chris- 
tians at the time when he himself became a Christian, 
then this statement is evidence that the Lord’s Supper 
was being observed as an ordinance of Jesus a few years, 
or possibly not many months, after the death of Jesus. 
“Received from the Lord” might possibly indicate a revela- 
tion made through prophets in the Christian cult meeting 
by the Spirit of the Lord. If so, then Luke,!® following 
 Paul’s statement in I Cor., would naturally incorporate 
the command into his account of the Last Supper. Ac- 
cording to the Acts, “the breaking of bread” was a re- 
ligious practice at first observed daily, and at a later time 
on the first day of the week.17 If this daily or weekly 
“breaking of bread” was the “Lord’s Supper’ then the 
“Lord’s Supper” was not, in the minds of the early 
Jerusalem Christians, closely identified with the annual 
Passover supper; otherwise it would have been celebrated 
but once a year. 

According to the Gospel of John the Last Supper of the 
Synoptic Gospels could not have been the Passover supper, 
but must have been eaten the night before the Passover. 
According to the Gospel of John Jesus died in the after- 
noon at the time when Passover lambs were being killed 
at the temple for use in the Passover supper to be eaten 
that evening.1® This Gospel describes a last meal (ch. 

*I Cor. XI:23. Many texts read “which is broken for you.” 

**Or some Gospel scribe, since the sentence is not found in all 
copies of Luke’s Gospel. 

* Acts II:42, 46, XX:7. 


* Jn. XVIII:28; ef. XIII:29. This is also the representation of 
the Peter Gospel fragment. 


Last SupreR wITH THE TWELVE 863 


XIII) eaten the evening of Jesus’ arrest, without giving 
any details about what was eaten or any hint that it was 
the Passover supper. There are some incidental indica- 
tions in the Synoptic Gospels themselves that their Last 
Supper was not the Passover supper, althougn, as we have 
seen, they explicitly identify the two.1® A last supper 
eaten twenty-four hours before the Passover supper would 
have about it an atmosphere charged with the thought of 
Passover sacrifice, and the utterances attributed to Jesus 
in the Synoptic Gospels would be appropriate to such an 
occasion. Such a supper would naturally have been secretly 
arranged, for Judas was then already looking for a chance 
to betray Jesus. Such a supper would naturally have given 
rise to the early Christian custom of the daily meal eaten 
with remembrance of Jesus’ last table companionship with 
his disciples and of his solemn pledge of abstinence from 
wine until the time of the Messianic banquet. Each at 
the daily meal would know that in the minds of all was 
the thought, “Till he come!” When the Passover came 
the next year and the years immediately following, Jew- 
ish Christian families might naturally have incorporated 
into the Passover ritual certain features of the Christian 
cult meal and so in time the idea might have prevailed in 
some circles that the original Last Supper had been the 
Passover supper. 

Whatever be the real facts regarding the origin of the 
Lord’s Supper, its value to us is the same. The loving 


* It is thought that the Sanhedrin would not have met and tried 
a case on the holy Passover day (which began in the evening in 
which the supper was eaten); the disciples would not have been 
carrying arms on a holy day, Mt. XXVI:51; Joseph could not have 
bought anything in the bazaar, Mk. XV:46; the annual release of 
& prisoner in the morning of the day when Jesus was crucified was 
presumably that he might be free to eat the Passover the following 
evening, Mk. XV:6-15, etc. 


364 Tue Lirz ann TEACHING or JESUS 


remembrance of our Lord and the spirit of united consecra- 
tion with which we eat the bread and drink the cup are due 
to something in him and his relation to us far more vital 
than an explicit, arbitrary commandment! 


. 


OHAPTER ZXXV 


JESUS ARRESTED IN THE OIL PRESS GARDEN 


such a strange turn, the men chanted a hymn and 

then came down from the upper room. The 
friendly householder was thanked for his courteous hos- 
pitality and the group started in the late evening toward — 
their lodgings in the eastern suburb on the Mount of 
Olives. It at once became evident that Jesus felt himself 
to be in immediate danger. He had spoken during the 
supper of treachery within the company of his table com- 
panions. He spoke now of a blow to be struck out of the 
dark at him, their leader, within the next few hours. It 
would be a deadly attack that would send them all flying 
in fear from his company. They all earnestly assured 
him that he could depend on them whatever might happen. 
Especially Peter, apparently his most forceful friend, who 
had held the group about him in previous emergencies 
(pp. 223, 286), assured him that he would stand faithfully 
by even if the rest should leave him. But Jesus solemnly 
assured Peter that before sunrise he would on three sepa- 
rate occasions deny having any connection with him. 
Jesus, who had some time before found corroboration in 
the scriptures for his growing expectation of a violent 
death is represented here to have cited an appropri- 


*Mk. XIV:26-31, Mt. XXVI:30-35, Lk. XXII:28-38. Luke here, 
as in all his account of the last week, shows the influence of another 
source in addition to Mk. 


. T the end of the supper, to which Jesus had given 


365 


366 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


ate prophetic utterance: “I will smite the shepherd and 
the sheep shall be scattered abroad.” ? At the same time ~ 
Jesus was as full of hope as he had been a few moments 
before when at the supper he spoke confidently of their 
reassembling at the victorious Messianic banquet. He said 
that after the catastrophe he was to be “raised up” and 
would precede them into Galilee, their old home, and ex- 
pect to meet them there.* He wished to comfort them be- 
forehand in anticipation of the chagrin they would feel 
as they should look back upon their cowardly conduct. 
What he meant by being “raised up” they could not under- 
stand. 

On their way to the Mount of Olives they stopped at a 
place named Gethsemane, or “Oil Press,” according to the 
Fourth Gospel a “garden” which Jesus frequently visited.* 
At the entrance to this place he left eight of his disciples 
to wait while he went farther into the garden to pray. — 
' He took with him Peter, James and John, but soon left 
them and went on a little farther to face God alone in 
one of the deepest religious experiences of his life. He 
seemed to be stationing these two groups as if in anticipa- 
tion of some attack to be made upon him. He told them 
to “watch.” He spoke more intimately to the smaller 
group regarding his feelings. He told them that he was — 
experiencing a distress of spirit that seemed like death to — 
him. They reported afterward that he seemed almost 
frightened (‘“‘amazed,” cf. Mk. XVI: 8) and exceedingly 
sad. He “began to be greatly amazed and sore troubled. 
And he saith unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful 
even unto death.” The three could easily see him in the 


* Zech. XIII:7. | 

* Luke omits this reference to Galilee and in his subsequent nar- 
rative gives no hint that Jesus after his resurrection visited Galilee. — 

*Mt. XXVI:36-46, Mk. XTV :32-42, Lk. XXII:39-46, Jn. XVIII:1-2. 


Jesus ARRESTED IN THE GARDEN 367 


light of the full moon (Passover came in the full of the 
lunar month) and could hear the words of his prayer. 
He fell repeatedly to the ground on his face and “prayed 
that if it were possible the hour might pass away from 
-him.” He used the Aramaic word for father, “abba,” 
which seems to have been combined with the Greek word 
in the common usage of the Greek-speaking Christians, 
especially in prayer.© ‘And he said, Abba-Father, all 
things are possible unto thee; remove this cup from me; 
howbeit not what I will but what thou wilt.” He had 
at an earlier time been convinced that God intended him 
to bring in the Kingdom through suffering a violent Mes- 
sianic death in some sense “sacrificial” (p. 241). This 
idea had just appeared in the two acted parables of the 
Last Supper. But he knew that God was resourceful and 
possibly had in reserve some other available way. If not, 
he was ready to go steadily on in the way of pain. If 
there was to be any other way it would naturally be ex- 
pected to open now, in time to save the traitor from the 
full guilt of consummating his treachery. 

What was it that caused Jesus’ extreme distress of 
spirit? What was the experience that he hoped God, with 
all the resources: at his command, might show him some 
way to avoid? And why did this terrible distress of spirit 
begin at this time rather than earlier? It seems hardly 
possible that the physical pain of crucifixion was what 
Jesus dreaded. Many martyrs have faced such a prospect 
without the terrible gloom and fear that Jesus experienced. 
The fact that the treachery, and consequent moral ruin, 
of a long time table companion were involved may have 
added to the poignancy of his distress. It was this that 
he had just been emphasizing at the Last Supper and 
this that was uppermost in his mind a few moments later: 

Of. Rom. VIII:15, Gal. IV:6. 


368 Tue Lire ann Tracuine or JESUS 


“Arise, let us be going. Behold, he that betrayeth me — 
is at hand!” 

But there may well have been something deeper down ~ 
in the soul of Jesus. He had finally been forced by the 
compulsion of his inner religious experience with the will 
of God to the distinct consciousness of a leadership that — 
was best described in current phraseology by the word — 
“Messianic” (p. 226). Messiahship was to him no merely 
official relationship, but a warm, elemental sense of direct — 
personal contact with the will of God and with the life © 
of the nation. He felt the will of God and he felé the life . 
of his people, and not only of his people but of the world. — 
Any Jewish leader would know that the Kingdom of God — 
was a world empire. A Jewish leader of Jesus’ profound | 
religious feeling and insight would necessarily look out — 
upon the life of all men with keenest interest. In the © 
Jewish and Gentile life all about him in Palestine he saw — 
what the life of man was; his inner contact with the will — 
of God made perfectly clear to him what God would have ~ 
it be and made him feel his own unique personal responsi- — 
bility of leadership in God’s way of making life what it 
ought to be. He directly felt the deep feeling of God — 
about the wrongdoing of men, and conceived it in terms 
of human love, that is, in terms of a Father’s love. It 
became his own feeling. He felt the feeling of the 
Heavenly Father about the wrongdoing of his human ~ 
children. Since God is a Father, one element in the com- — 
posite consciousness of God, as his life presses close up — 
against brutal human selfishness, must be suffering. 
Therefore as the vast consciousness of God pressed up 
for genuine vital expression in the receptive soul of Jesus 
it caused Jesus profound suffering. In the representation 
of Luke it caused the sweat to drip from his body in great 
drops as drops of blood fall fast from a dripping wound. 





Jesus ARRESTED IN THE GaRpEN 369 


The disciples must have afterward reported that Jesus 
came to them, his clothing drenched with perspiration. 

No really new facts about human selfishness came to 
Jesus’ attention at this time, but this selfishness was 
swiftly coming to a fierce concrete expression. ‘Toward 
him, the conscious embodiment of the mighty, righteous, 
loving will of God the Heavenly Father, the hate, treach- 
ery and moral cowardice of his human children were even 
then stealing through the darkness to strike a death blow. 
To feel the feeling of God in such a situation seemed 
more than he could endure. In response to his prayer 
to be spared any further experience of such suffering a 
degree of relief came. Perhaps new tides of strength 
from the strong underlying life of God rose within him. 
Perhaps the pressure upon his soul of the element of pain 
in the vast composite consciousness of God abated 
somewhat.® 

Three times in the dark hour he returned to his three 
friends, presumably to talk with them and find comfort, 
but each time he found the tired men sleeping.’ His 
special reproach was for Peter, who had just before given 
such vehement assurance that he would surely stand by. 
Temptation to the disloyalty of which Jesus had just be- 
fore been warning him was near. He ought to have been 
watching and praying in preparation for it. Jesus dealt 
considerately with him. The “spirit,” or better nature 

*The writer of Hebrews says that Jesus prayed to be delivered 
“out of death,” that is to be delivered out of the realm of the dead, 
so that ‘his soul should not be left in Hades.’ In that case the 
speedy resurrection in three days was conceived to be God’s answer, 
Heb. V:7, cf. Acts I1:27. In the circle from which Luke’s source 
came it was believed that God must have sent an angel to strengthen 
him. Apparently then as now men reverently speculated about the 
nature of this impressive experience. 


* Luke with his usual reverence for “the apostles” says that “they 
were sleeping for sorrow.” 


370 Tue Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


of a man, gives willing assent to duty, he said, but the 
“flesh,” or lower nature, is weak in carrying out the spirit’s 
good intent. | 

When Jesus returned the third time his watchful eye 
saw the flickering torches ® of an approaching company in» 
the distance and he sharply brought the drowsy men to 
their feet by saying: “Do you sleep on, then, and take 
your rest? Enough (of sleep)! The hour is come! Be- 
hold the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of 
sinners !”’ 

The Synoptic Gospels give no account of what Judas 
had been doing in the last hour or two. Apparently ds 
soon as he could do so he slipped away from the supper 
out into the night® and hurried away to the waiting 
priests and scribes with information regarding Jesus’ 
whereabouts which he had not been able to give them be- 
fore. He led a company of temple police and servants of 
the High Priest,!° perhaps first to the house he had just — 
left, hoping to find Jesus still there. When they found 
that Jesus and his company had left they started for the — 
lodgings in Bethany, but stopped on the way in the Kidron 
Valley at the Oil Press Garden which, according to the | 
Fourth Gospel, Judas knew to be a favorite resort of 
Jesus.‘ Judas at once stepped forward and fervently 1? — 
kissed him either on hand or cheek. Luke shrinks from — 
saying that the traitor’s defiling lips actually touched 
Jesus. In the Matthew Gospel Jesus addresses him by ~ 
a title which expresses a courteous recognition of relation- 


*Jn. XVIII:3. 

° Of. In. XIII:27-30. 

* There was a cohort of Roman soldiers with their chiliarch in 
addition to officers of the Jews according to Jn. XVIII:3. 

4 Mk, XIV :43-52, Mt. XXVI:47-56, LK. XXII:47-53. 

% An intensive form of the verb, used also of the father’s kiss 
in the parable of the Prodigal Son, Lk. XV:20. 


Jesus ARRESTED IN THE GarRpDEN 871 


ship and either asks him why he is there, or more probably 
bids him do at once, without the mockery of a kiss, what he 
has really come to do. The officers instantly stepped for- 
. ward and placed Jesus under arrest. Judas had warned 
them to tie him up promptly and securely,'* fearing either 
some exercise of unusual power on the part of Jesus or 
that Jesus would slip away in the confusion if his disci- 
ples should make vigorous resistance. In the excitement 
of the moment one of Jesus’ friends (Peter, according to 
John’s Gospel) drew his dagger, struck at the high priest’s 
servant, who was perhaps doing the binding, and slashed 
off hisear. (According to Lk. Jesus healed it by a touch.) 
Jesus objected (Mt.) to this well-meant attempt at defence 
on the ground that those who resort to the sword shall 
perish by the sword. This sounds like an appeal to fear 
that is unlike Jesus. He had warned his disciples that 
they must all bravely expect to perish by the cross 1* and 
perishing by the sword would not be essentially different. 
Perhaps his meaning was that to use the sword in such 
a situation would only result in a bloody free fight in 
which disciples would be killed without accomplishing 
anything vital, since God meant to have his Messiah die. 
He had said so in the scriptures. If God had not meant 
to have his Messiah die he could have sent to the defence 
of Jesus as many legions of fighting angels as there were 
apostles. ‘“Thinkest thou not that I cannot beseech my 
Father, and he shall even now send me more than twelve 
legions of angels? How then should the scriptures be 
fulfilled, that thus it must be?” 2° 

Mk. XIV:44, 

* Mk. VIII:34. 

* Mt. XXVI:53. In Lk. XXI1:35-38, Jesus at the Last Supper 
had warned them that a time was coming when they would need to 


make all possible provision for meeting danger and hardship. In 
picturesque language he had said, “Sell your cloak and buy a . 


372 Tuer Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


After having repressed this incipient purpose to fight, 
Jesus turned upon the arresting party and accused them 
of cowardice. They had not dared to arrest him openly, 
during the daytime, when he had been teaching every day 
in the temple colonnades. Instead they had attacked him > 
by night with knives and clubs as if he had been a robber! 
His indignation may have been aroused by recognizing in 
their action a shrewd scheme to cheapen him by proceed- 
ing against him as one who was a disreputable character, 
rather than to ascribe to him the dignity of a false prophet 
or a spurious Messiah. Indications of this policy will 
appear again later. 

When the disciples found that Jesus proposed to repress 
all efforts at defence and to surrender quietly, they speed- 
ily escaped in the darkness rather than surrender with 
him. The officers might naturally have wished to arrest 
all the party to keep them from bringing information about 
the arrest of Jesus to his friends in the city. According 
to the Fourth Gospel Jesus requested the officers not to 
arrest his disciples.1® 

Mark alone mentions a half dressed young man who 
was nearly arrested, but escaped in the struggle, leaving 
his single garment behind him. The incident must have 
had some special interest for Mark’s readers, and the fact 
that nevertheless the name is omitted has led to the possi- 
ble supposition that the young man was John Mark him- 
self. The last supper may have been eaten in his father’s 
house, which was later used as a meeting place for the 
early Jerusalem Christians.17 Perhaps when Judas 
dagger.” They called his attention to the fact that they had two 
daggers in the company. He did not stop to explain that his lan- 
guage had been purely symbolical and simply said “That will be a 
plenty!” 


Jn. XVIII:8. 
4 Acts XII:12. 


Jesus ARRESTED IN THE GARDEN 373 


brought the arresting party to the house and found Jesus 
gone, the young man wakened from sleep, caught up a 
sheet (“linen cloth’) and ran ahead to warn Jesus in the 
' place to which he heard Judas proposing to conduct the 
police. 


CHAPTER XXXVI 


THE TRIAL OF JESUS 


CCORDING to all three Synoptic Gospels Jesus 
WAN was at once taken to the High Priest,’ the presi- 
dent of the Jewish high court, or sanhedrin. Mem- 
bers of this court had either already gathered expecting 
Jesus, or were in their homes awaiting the president’s 
summons. Mark and the Matthew Gospel give a somewhat 
detailed account of the trial, which occurred in the night, 
but was followed in the morning by a second session in 
which either the proceedings of the night session were 
formally ratified or arrangements were made for proceed- 
ing quickly to the office of the Roman procurator whose 
endorsement was legally necessary.2, In Luke’s Gospel 
there is only one session of the court, and that after day- 
break.? Luke’s account gives much less of detail than that 
in Mark and Matthew.* 


1Called by Josephus, Joseph Caiaphas, and assigned by him to a 
period approximately 18-36 A.D. Ant. XVIITI:2:2, 4:3. 

7Mk. XIV:53-65, XV:1, Mt. XXVI:57-68, XXVITI:1-2. 

*Lk, XXII:54, XXII:66-XXIIT:1. 

‘In the Fourth Gospel there is no trial at all before the Jewish 
Court. In the house of Annas, an ex-High Priest, father-in-law of 
Caiaphas the High Priest, Jesus was asked some informa] questions 
either by Annas or Caiaphas; our text leaves it uncertain by which. 
(The Sinaitic Syriac text places our v. 24 between vs. 13 and 14, 
and so represents the questioner to have been Caiaphas.) Jesus, in 
‘@ manner which seemed to the bystanders too independent, refused 
to answer these questions (Jn. XVIII:19-22). The examination led 
to no decision. Annas sent Jesus bound to the house of Caiaphas 


374 


Tur Tria or JESUS 376 


When the court assembled it was found that there were 
no witnesses at hand whose testimony was sufficient to 
convict Jesus on any serious charge. A number of wit- 
~ nesses had been secured but their testimony was not suf- 
ficiently accordant to meet the requirements of the court’s 
rules of evidence. This scrupulousness of the court ‘in 
this particular does not always receive the recog- 
nition it deserves. There were conscientious sanhedrists, 
who like Rabbi Saul later in lower courts, sincerely re- 
garded Jesus as an irreligious man doing unspeakable 
damage to the religious life of the nation.©° These men 
would be scrupulously honest in scrutinizing evidence. 
On the other hand there had evidently come to be bitter 
personal antagonism to Jesus and there may have been in 
and: about the court those who were eager to assemble 
witnesses without careful inquiry as to their credi- 
bility. 

According to Mark, followed pretty closely by the Mat- 
thew Gospel, there were several stages in the trial. There 
was first a period in which all the members of the court, 
led by the president and his kinsmen, looked about for 


who, apparently without further examination, took him early in 
the morning to the office of the Roman procurator. The procurator, 
who recognized that there had been no Jewish trial, offered to the 
Jews the privilege of trying their prisoner themselves; “Take him 
yourselves and judge him according to your law.” This privilege 
they did not care for inasmuch as such a trial could not legally 
issue in his execution (XVIII:31). Perhaps by the time when the 
Asiatic Fourth Gospel was written Jewish communities in Asia had 
no such right of initiating serious prosecutions as had existed at 
an earlier time in Palestine, and the account was, therefore, modi- 
fied to suit current usage. 

*“T verily thought with myself that I ought to do many things 
contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth. And this I also did 
in Jerusalem: and I both shut up many of the saints in prisons, 
having received authority from the chief priests, and when they 
were put to death I gave my vote against them.” Acts XXVI:9-10. 


376 THe Lire anp Tracuina oF JESUS 


witnesses. They found many, but they did not agree in 
the details of their testimony. ‘Now the chief priests 
and the whole council sought witness against Jesus to put 
him to death; and found it not. For many bore false wit- 
ness against him, and their witness agreed not together.” 
What they testified to is not stated—presumably to alleged 
instances of law breaking, especially Sabbath breaking 
which had long before been seized upon by the Galilean 
scribes as deserving death (p. 114). A certain group testi- 
fied that Jesus had spoken disrespectfully of the temple 
as an inferior building “made by hands,” perhaps a covert 
slur upon the part the evil Herod had played in its con- 
struction; he had further boasted that within three days 
he would replace it by another, a better one, built in 
some miraculous way, ‘made without hands.” ‘This was 
a charge calculated to exasperate people generally.® If 
Jesus could have been duly convicted on this charge, his 
popular following would have largely fallen away from 
him, while the priests and scribes would have been exon- 
erated from all blame for their hostility to him. His re- 
cent assumption of authority in the temple (p. 311), could 
have been turned to account against him. But the wit- 
nesses did not agree in the details of their testimony. 

Then the president himself tried to induce Jesus to de- 
fend himself against these miscellaneous charges, hoping 
that Jesus would say something on the spot that would 
furnish ground for his conviction. Jesus refused to speak. 
He did not propose to have his case pulled down to the 
level of any cheap charge. 


Finally, when Jesus seemed likely to escape conviction, 


the High Priest asked him directly a question that was in 


all their minds, but that they had hoped not to raise. 
Their great fear had been that he would be tempted by 


*Cf. Acts VI:12-14. 


al eS eS Se 


_ Tue Triat or Jesus 877 


his popularity to indulge in a Messianic ambition. The 
High Priest now probed directly toward this point in the 
consciousness of Jesus: “The High Priest asked him and 
. saith unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the 

Blessed” (‘the Son of God,” Mt.)? To this question 
Jesus at once made an unhesitating reply. He said that 
he was the Messiah, a Messiah of the Son of Man type, 
and that his judges would soon find the present situation 
reversed. He would be coming in the clouds of heaven to 
judge them. “And Jesus said, I am; and ye shall see 
the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and 
coming with the clouds of heaven.” * Instantly the High 
Priest tore a rent in his robe, apparently a usual piece of | 
dramatic symbolism expressing his indignant abhorrence 
of the prisoner’s guilt. He charged Jesus with blasphemy, 
and the court without hesitation voted the death sentence. 
To pose as a patriotic revolutionary Messianic leader was 
probably technically not blasphemy. But it was con- 
sidered blasphemous in the case of such a man as the court 
conceived Jesus to be, a flagrantly irreligious person, a 
law breaker acting in league with Satan to seduce God’s 
people from God’s service. This would especially be 
so in the case of one who asserted himself to be a Mes- 
siah, not of the Son of David kind, but the Son of Man, 
who was understood to be with God in heaven, hidden 
away there as God’s chief treasure until the time for his 

"In the Matthew Gospel the reply is, “Thow hast said,” or “Hast 
thou said so?” This may be a simple affirmative reply, or it may 
be that Jesus put the responsibility of the public revelation of the 
Messianic secret that he had so faithfully kept, upon the High Priest: 
“You, not I, have said it.” The Matthew Gospel also adds the 
italicised words, “Furthermore, I say unto you, from now shall you 
see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power, etc.” The 
expression “from now,” or “henceforth,” represents Jesus as recog- 


nizing that the end of life on earth is at hand. His admission of 
Messiahship will result in a death sentence, and in his return to God. 


378 Tue Lire anp TRracHIne oF JESUS 


revelation in clouds of glory as Messianic judge of the 
world should come. 

At the close of the trial some, apparently members of 
the court, began to express their abhorrence or personal 
spite by spitting upon him. Others proposed in derision to 
test his supernatural power of prophetic discernment by 
blindfolding him and asking him to tell who struck him. 
If he could foresee himself on the right hand of God, 
or had power to build a temple in three days he ought to 
be able to see through the bandage over his eyes! Then 
the officers of the court “received him with blows” and 
roughly hustled him away to some part of the palace 
where he could be under guard until daylight.® 

During the early morning hours Peter had a sad ex- 
perience. When other disciples at the time of the arrest 
ran out into the darkness and hid themselves, Peter fol- 
lowed the arresting party at a considerable distance in 
the rear. He soon slipped into the open court around 
which the high priest’s house was built and mingled with 
the crowd of lesser officials and servants. who had gathered 
about the large firepot to warm themselves in the chill 
air of the early April morning on the Judean plateau. 
What happened there was reported, with some natural 
variation of detail, among the early Christians. Accord- 
ing to Mark one of the servant girls noticed Peter and 
said in his hearing that she had seen him with Jesus, re- 
ferring either to the time of Jesus’ arrest or to public 


* There has been much discussion as to the legality of the process 
described in Mark. If the mode of procedure given in the Talmud 
at a later date actually prevailed in Jesus’ day, then there were 
certain departures from it in the case of Jesus’ trial. But it is 
necessary to remember that Mark’s account is very condensed and 
that there is no indication that the Gospel writers saw anything 
irregular in the details of procedure. It was the feeling of the 
authorities toward Jesus that seemed to them so inexcusable. 


Tue Trap or JEsus : 379 


meetings at the temple. Peter at once denied that he had 
any idea of what could have given her this impression, 
and soon withdrew into the dark passage way leading 
from the court yard out to the street. Either in this 
passage way or after Peter had returned to the group 
about the brazier, the same young woman saw him and 
again expressed to the group her sinister suspicion that 
he was “one of them.” Peter again denied it, but very 
soon the suspicion became general and a number of them 
taxed him with it. They told him that he was evidently 
a Galilean. (He had the northern brogue, Mt.) Then 
Peter, feeling himself in great danger, denied with vehe- 
ment and solemn oaths that he had any acquaintance what- 
ever, with the person they were mentioning. “I know 
not this man of whom you speak.” Just then he happened 
to hear the second cockcrowing of the early morning, and 
remembered Jesus’ prediction the evening before of a 
three-fold denial before the time of second cockcrowing. 
The realization of what he had done seemed almost to 
break his heart. He left the place and as he went.along 
some unfrequented street, perhaps on his way to Bethany, 
with his cloak drawn over his face, he “wept bitterly.” 
Luke, who departs from Mark’s order and makes the 
trial (of which he gives a condensed account) to have been 
held after daybreak, pictures Jesus waiting in the early 
morning for trial in some place where he turned about and 
caught Peter’s eye at the very moment of his last denial! ® 
Peter was a strong man, true and reliable, who never- 
theless at the first sudden onset of temptation might flinch 
for a time. Years afterward Paul thought that he dis- 
covered this trait in Peter (though Peter was then as- 
sociated with some very respectable persons), and called 


*With his usual deference for an apostle Luke makes no mention 
of Peter’s oaths. 


380 Tus Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


it by a very disagreeable name which is obscured in our 
English translation.?° : 

Early in the morning, as soon as the Roman procurator 
was ready for business in his office (probably either in 
the barracks adjoining the temple courts or in Herod’s 
palace across the city, near the Jaffa Gate), Jesus, still 
securely tied, was brought before him by the officers of — 
the sanhedrin.1!_ The chief priests and elders led the way 
to see that the procurator did not fail them. His endorse- 
ment of the sanhedrin’s sentence was necessary before 
Jesus could be executed. 

The procurator’s first question, “Are you the King of 
the Jews?” shows that the charge, as stated by the 
sanhedrin in its official document, emphasized the politi- 
cal aspects of Messiahship most likely to seem flagrantly 
offensive to a Roman official. As was seen earlier, Mes- 
siahship was a flexible term with a somewhat varying 
content (p. 40). Jesus’ reply, “You say so,” seems to 
be regarded by the narrators as an assent, or at least an 
admission that the charge was in some sense true. Then 
the chief priests and elders with oriental intensity began 
to accuse him violently.?? 

To the procurator’s amazement Jesus remained silent. 
Prisoners usually utilized this opportunity to make a pas- 
sionate defence or a plea for mercy. Pilate urged Jesus 
to make some defence. He would probably have been 
glad to seize upon anything that Jesus might have urged 
in his defence and used it as a sufficient ground for refus- 


* Gal. II:11-14, “hupokrisis,” cf. Mk. XIT:15. 

4 Mk. XV:1-20, Mt. XXVII:1-26, Lk. XXIII:1-25. 

The Greek may be translated “accused him much” or “accused 
him of many things.” If “of many things,” then they detailed 
various things, e.g., “perverting the nation,” “forbidding to give 
tribute to the Romans,” etc. (Lk.), that might be interpreted as 
evidence of Messianic ambition. 


Tue Triau or JxEsus © 881 


ing his endorsement of the sanhedrin’s sentence. Accord- 
ing to Mark, he had previous knowledge about Jesus; 
he knew “that for envy, the chief priests had delivered 
him up.” As an efficient procurator 1% he must have kept 
' posted through spies regarding the popular movement in 
Jesus’ favor. He knew about Jesus’ bold attempt a few 
days before to reform the abuses connected with the priests’ 
administration of the temple and about the weak failure 
of the priests, through fear of the people, to call him to 
account. According to the Matthew Gospel he may have 
had some more definitely personal information about Jesus, 
perhaps through household servants, for his wife had that 
night dreamed about Jesus, and sent a message to him 
while he was hearing the case warning him to have “noth- 
ing to do with that righteous man.” She would not have 
“suffered much this day in a dream” about one in whom 
she had not previously been much interested. Pilate had 
clearly made up his mind that Jesus was a religious re- 
former with no political ambition, and was bent on saving 
him from the malice of the priests. 

At one point in the hearing Pilate thought that he saw 
a way out, even though Jesus refused to make any defence. 
A crowd came up to his office to request the customary 
annual release of some prisoner at Passover time. Pilate 
said instantly with a tinge of humorous sarcasm, “I will 
release the King of the Jews!” When the priests saw that 
Jesus was likely to slip through their hands, they hurried 
about among the newly arrived crowd aad urged them to 
ask, not for Jesus but for an insurrectionist named Barab- 
bas, or according to some readings,’* Jesus Barabbas, so 
that the choice may have rather strangely lain between 


**He held office for ten years, 26-36, under Tiberius, a rather 
scrupulous Emperor in provincial administration. 
* H.g., Sinaitic Syriac on Mt. XXVII:16. 


382 Tue Lirkr anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


Jesus Barabbas and Jesus Christ.1° When the crowd 
chose Barabbas, Pilate asked what he should do with “the 
King of the Jews!” The newly arrived crowd, stirred 
up by the priests, joined the sanhedrin crowd in a savage 
shout for his crucifixion. Pilate, unwilling to abandon 
his desire to release Jesus, tried to argue with them. 
According to Luke, who emphatically contrasts Pilate’s 
desire for Jesus’ release with the officials’ desire for his 
execution,!® “he said unto them the third time, What evil 
hath he done?” and proposed to content them by scourging 
him, and then let him go. But each time they implacably 
shouted “Crucify him.” So finally Pilate, “‘wishing to 
content the multitude,” released Barabbas and delivered 
Jesus for scourging and -crucifixion. He knew from ex- 
perience how easily a Jerusalem mob might be excited 
and how like wild fire the mob spirit might spread among 
the excitable Passover multitudes. His political interests 
too were involved. He could not afford to have the high 
priests report at Rome that he was favoring a dangerous 
revolutionary leader, whom they in loyalty to the Emperor 
wished to execute.*? 

Luke prolongs the description of Pilate’s connection 
with the case by narrating Pilate’s effort to put off on 
Herod, tetrarch of Galilee, who happened to be in the 
city, the responsibility of dealing with a Galilean prisoner. 
Herod had long wished to see his famous Galilean subject 
and hoped to have an exhibition made of something from 
Jesus’ repertoire of “miracles”! When Jesus refused 


*% Bar Abba is a common name in the Talmud (Wiinsche) and 
means “Son of a Father,” that is, “Son of a Teacher,” or some other 
honorable man. No such significance may have been attached to it 
in the case of Barabbas. 

* Cf, Acts III:13-15. 

7 Of. Jn. XIX:12-15, and the dramatic otarmctation of the 
whole incident in the context. 


Tue Trt or JEsus 383 


to speak even a word Herod as a joke dressed him up in 
royal robes befitting a king, and sent him back to Pilate. 
He had no wish to involve himself unnecessarily in a mat- 
_ter that might irritate his own Galilean subjects. The 
interchange of courtesies led Pilate and Herod to the 
pleasant settlement of some disagreement that had arisen 
between them.*® 

Jesus’ experience in Gethsemane had convinced him that 
God had no other way in reserve, and that he must, there- 
fore, go steadily forward to crucifixion. We naturally 
wish for power of insight that would reveal to us the re 
ligious experience through which the soul of Jesus was 
passing during these bitter hours of the trial before vin- 
dictive and cowardly officials. ‘The writer of Hebrews 
had these hours in mind when he said of Jesus that “he 
learned obedience through the things that he suffered.” 


* Lk. XXIII:6-12. 


CHAPTER XXXVII 


THE EXECUTION OF JESUS 


death sentence he turned back to the office routine 
of the day with no consciousness of having fast- 
ened his name forever in the history of the race! Jesus was 
brought by a detail of soldiers into the open court of the 
barracks, to wait there while arrangements for his execu- 
tion were being made. Either there or before he left 
Pilate’s presence he was brutally whipped as the first in- 
stallment of his terrible sentence. In the barracks the 
whole cohort (‘‘band’’) was called together to take ad- 
vantage of an unusual opportunity for sport.1 Here was 
a poor Jewish fool who thought himself “King of the 
Jews!” The soldiers proceeded to treat him like a king. 
Some officer’s cast-off cloak with a suggestion of royal 
purple in its faded color was thrown over his shoulders; 
a thorny twig was twisted into a circlet and pressed down 
upon his head; a hard dry reed was thrust as a sceptre 
into his hand, which was now unbound ready for cruci- 
fixion. They kneeled before him shouting “Hail, King 
of the Jews” and then suddenly sprang up, spit upon him, 
and beat him furiously on the head with his own sceptre! 
They then led him out of the city, to the place of execu- 
tion, with two other prisoners, condemned brigands, ready © 
1Mk. XV:16-20, Mt. XXVII:27-31. Luke omits the scene, perhaps 


as too revolting or inconsistent with his picture of the majestic 
Lord. 


A FTER Pilate had affixed his signature to Jesus’ 


384 


Tue ExxrovurTion oF JESUS 8385 


for execution that morning by the same detail of soldiers. 
The place of execution was called “Golgotha,” “The Skull,” 
(Lat. calvaria), a skull-shaped elevation where, apparently, 
crucifixions customarily took place.?_ On the way to Gol- 
gotha they for some reason found it necessary to impress 
a passer-by to carry the horizontal piece of the cross which 
condemned men usually carried for themselves. The 
man was Simon from North Africa, probably a Passover 
pilgrim lodging in the suburbs. He was naturally, because 
of this incident, a famous character among the early 
Christians. Two of his sons, Alexander and Rufus, were 
evidently well-known Christians in the section of the 
church in and about Rome for which Mark’s Gospel was 
prepared.* 

When the group reached Golgotha someone offered Jesus 
a drink of myrrhed wine® (a drink said to have been 
usually provided by a society of benevolent Jerusalem 
ladies) apparently given to deaden the pain of the cruci- 
fied. Jesus tasted it (Mt.), but as soon as he found out 
what it was would not drink it. He had recently pledged 
himself to drink no wine until the Messianic banquet. 
Furthermore; if it was intended te stupefy him he may 
have refused it because he wished to be in full pos- 
session of his powers during these last hours. He could 
not tell what might happen in them. Since the ex- 
perience in Gethsemane he probably had no thought that 

?Mk. XV:21-41, Mt. XXVII:32-56, Lk. XXIIT:26-49. 

*This was later thought to indicate a weakness on the part of 
Jesus which probably occasioned unfavorable comment by the 
critics of the gospel. In the Fourth Gospel, for another reason also, 
pains are taken to eliminate the whole episode, “he went out bear- 
ing the cross for himself to the place of a skull, which is called 
in Hebrew Golgotha.” Jn. XIX:17. 

‘In the fifties a Christian man named Rufus lived either in Rome 


or Ephesus, more probably Rome. Rom. XVI:13. 
*Mt. influenced by Ps. LXIX:21, says “wine mixed with gall.” 


386 Tue Lire anp TEAOGHING oF JESUS 


God might take him from the cross. (The fact that some 
of the bystanders thought that Elijah might come to do 
this, shows that the idea would not have seemed absurd.) 
But he did not know what chance there might be to com- 
municate with his family and other friends. He knew 
that some of the women were near by. He may have 
seen them on the way out, for they appear later in the 
narrative, grouped within sight of the cross, but far. 
enough away to be safe from insult. 

The horrible details of crucifixion are not given in the 
narrative. It simply says: “And they crucify him.” 
According to some manuscripts of Luke, Jesus prayed for 
the soldiers who were nailing his hands and feet (Lk. 
XXIII: 34) to the cross: “Father forgive them for they 
do not know what they are doing.” It seemed to the 
early Christians a notable circumstance that Jesus had 
conspicuous evil doers on his right and left hand. He 
who had associated freely with “sinners” in his lifetime 
had their companionship also in death. 

The narrative contains certain details of what went on 
about the cross which were probably much dwelt upon 
by the early preachers. The soldiers, taking their usual 
perquisite, divided Jesus’ clothes among themselves by 
throwing dice. Some nameless soldier wore, or sold for 
drink at the wine-shop, the cloak that the sick had longed 
to touch! The three crosses evidently stood near a highway 
where many passed by. The priests saw to it that all 
such should not be influenced by the charge put up over 
Jesus’ head, “The King of the Jews.” They were made 
instead to understand in accordance with the plan of the 
prosecutors at the trial, that he was one who had made 
sacrilegious threats against the holy temple. These pas- 
sers-by shook their heads in sarcastic pretence of pity over 
the sad downfall of him who had proposed to destroy the 


Tuer Exrcurion or JESsuUs 387 


temple and build it again in three days. Will he not, 
in the exercise of his wonderful power, come down from 
the cross and save himself! The chief priests and the 
scribes, members of the high court, gloated over their suc- 
cess; they talked sneeringly among themselves in Jesus’ 
hearing about the preposterous Messianic ambition which 
they had been fortunate enough to uncover in the trial. 
He had proposed to be a Messianic deliverer of others, but 
now he cannot even deliver himself! They leered into 
his face, only a few feet above their heads, and said, 
“Let the Christ, the King of Israel, now come down from 
the cross that we may see and believe!”? So low down in 
apparent degradation was Jesus that even the two 
brigands on either side could despise him: “They that 
were crucified with him reproached him.” 

Luke, who is evidently following a most interesting 
source of information not used by Mark or the Matthew 
compiler, gives a different picture of one of the brigands. 
It is not quite clear how this man’s mind worked. He 
cannot have thought Jesus to be the Messiah, for even 
Jesus’ own disciples gave up that theory when they finally 
saw him successfully crucified. The man had perhaps been 
impressed by Jesus’ behavior on the cross. Most men 
in Jesus’ place would have hurled down bitter, abusive 
curses upon their executioners and jeering enemies. But 
Jesus, as the early church always with devout wonder 
remembered, ‘‘when he was reviled, reviled not, when he 
suffered, threatened not.” ® ‘The brigand must have re- 
garded Jesus as an extraordinarily good man who was pos- 
sessed by the insane delusion that he was the King of the 
Jews. His heart moved out in sincere sympathy with 
Jesus. He accommodated himself:to Jesus’ delusion and 
said: “Jesus, do not forget me when you come to your 

*I Pet. II:23. 


388 Tue Lirzt anp Tracuine or JESUS 


kingdom!” Jesus saw in this expression of sympathy 


the vital element in faith and assured him that before 
sunset they would be walking together in the Beautiful 
Garden,’ 

The crucifixion had begun about nine o’clock. About 
twelve o’clock the clouds thickened into an awesome dark- 
ness that lay like the heavy wrath of God over the whole 
region until three o’clock. (The Peter Gospel says that 
“darkness covered Judwa.”) The early preachers would 
naturally remember the words of Amos, the prophet: 
‘“‘And it shall come to pass in that day (of wrath), saith 
the Lord Jehovah, that I will cause the sun to go down at 
noon, and I will darken the earth in the clear day.” § 

In the gloom of the awesome shadow a voice loud and 
tense with pain was heard from the cross, “My God, my 
God, why hast thou forsaken me!” It was a natural cry 
from a man in agony and need not be pressed to indicate 
any deep theological meaning. It is unthinkable that God 
should have been displeased with Jesus in this hour of 
his supreme obedience, or that he should have created in 
the mind of Jesus the delusion that he was displeased with 
him. This certainly was not the thought of the Pauline 
section of the early church.® The words are the opening 
sentence of the twenty-second Psalm. The first half of 
this Psalm describes the condition of a tortured man, or 
people, and the last half shines with the glory of God, 

* Paradise was thought to be in the third of the seven heavens; cf. 
II Cor, XII:2-4. Secrets of Enoch VIII. The Peter Gospel frag- 
ment represents this robber to have rebuked the soldiers for casting 
lots over Jesus’ garments; they became angry and “commanded that 
his legs should not be broken, that he might die in torment.” The 
crucified were sometimes battered to death with heavy mallets as a 
merciful ending of their suffering. 

*Amos VIII:9. 


*He became “obedient even unto death, yea the death of the cross. 
Wherefore God highly exalted him,” Phil. II:8-9. 


Tus Exrourion or Jzsus 389 


in one sentence (v. 28) almost using the phrase “King- 
dom of God.” That is, the Psalm pictures extreme suffer- 
ing opening the way for the coming of Jehovah’s Kingdom, 
an idea that had for a considerable time been in the mind 
of Jesus. He had made a study of the scriptures con- 
cerned with the Kingdom of God, particularly those em- 
phasizing Messianic suffering (p. 239). This entire Psalm, 
with its picture of triumph following suffering, may have 
been in his mind when he uttered its opening sentence. 
Luke omits the bitter cry of Jesus, “My God, my God, 
why has thou forsaken me?’ Perhaps it seemed to 
him likely to be misunderstod by his readers, and further- 
more was probably not in the special source which he 
used in addition to Mark’s Gospel. 

The name of God, both in its Aramaic and Hebrew 
form, sounds something like the Greek form of the name 
Elijah. Some by-standers, perhaps Greek-speaking Jews 
like Simon of North Africa who had carried the cross, 
thought that Jesus was calling for Elijah, who according to 
the Talmud was often expected to appear in time of need. 
One of these men saturated a sponge with sour wine from 
the jar standing near for the soldiers’ use, fastened it on 
a stiff reed, and after asking permission from the soldiers, 
reached it up to Jesus’ lips. He proposed to give Jesus 
strength enough to keep calling on Elijah until Elijah 
perhaps would come.?° 

At this point Jesus gave a loud cry and died suddenly ; 
he did not gradually grow faint and expire. No one ex- 


*In the Matthew Gospel there is a different version of the in- 
cident. There the bystanders protest against the action on the 
ground that Jesus’ unrelieved distress may serve to bring Elijah. 
If the Matthew compiler was following Mark here, he may have 
swerved from him in favor of a popular version of the incident 
current in oral tradition. In the verses immediately following 
(52-53) something that was apparently popular tradition appears. 


890 Tue Lirm anp Tracuine or JEsus 


pected the end to come so soon. The crucified sometimes 
lived until they starved to death.11_ The two robbers, ac- 
cording to the Fourth Gospel, were beaten to death to 
expedite the execution. Some form of profound mental 
distress seems to have caused the speedy death of Jesus. 
Luke only of the first three Gospels attributes words to 
Jesus in connection with this final strong cry. Jesus 
trustfully calls upon his Father, and commits his spirit 
to him in a sentence found in the thirty-first Psalm, a 
Psalm of deliverance from suffering inflicted by implac- 
able enemies: “Father, into thy hands I commend my 
spirit.” 

We to whom Jesus is Lord and Savior would, if we 
could, penetrate into the actual experience of his soul in 
these hours on the cross. What did the Heavenly Father 
mean to him in these dark hours of pain and shame? 
What did men mean to him, the men about the cross, 
professional executioners, idle spectators, malignant 
enemies, and the unseen multitudes over all the earth to 
whom his thought had constantly gone out in the months 
during which the burden of Messianic world responsibility 
had fitted itself so closely to his soul? Had he uplifting 
sense of doing some great thing for humanity? We have 
in earlier chapters thought of him as being so responsive 
to the feeling of the Heavenly Father about his human 
children as to be its perfect expression in terms of human 
life and death. The pain which is in the heart of God 
over the brutal wrongdoing of his human children was 
now to the utmost in the heart of Jesus. It was not simply 
the pain of stretched tendons, lacerated muscles, and burn- 
ing thirst. It was chiefly distress of soul. He was feeling 
the feeling of God about the wrongdoing of mankind. 
He could have said of himself in this experience, “He that 

“ Eusebius, Ch. Hist., VIII:8. 


Tur Exxrcution or JEsuUs 391 


has seen me has seen the Father.” To see Jesus on the 
cross with some appreciation of the experience of his 
inmost soul is to look into the heart of the Heavenly 
Father. The utmost that a Father can do to redeem from 
his evil ways a son who has gone wrong is in some way 
to show the son the pain that is in the Father’s heart. 
More and more with our enlarging understanding of God 
and his Fatherly nearness to human life we see in the 
Christ on the cross that which shames us into an ever 
deeper resentment of the evil in our hearts. We come 
more and more to feel about selfishness as he on his cross 
felt about it. The chief element in the pain of his cruci- 
fixion hours begins at least feebly to form itself in our 
hearts and we begin to know a little of what it is to be 
crucified with him. We find ourselves being redeemed 
from bondage to the evil will. The experience of the 
great soul of Jesus was so profound that men can only 
slowly grow up to it. In centuries to come, as new gen- 
erations of men feel the force of the subtler and more per- 
vasive temptations that await the race in the higher stages 
of its development, the Christ on the cross will be an in- 
exhaustible and everlasting source of redemption. 

It was learned later, perhaps from Christian priests 
(Acts VI:7), that on this afternoon the veil screening off 
the holiest room in the temple was torn in two by a rent 
which, since it was known to have begun at the top, evi- 
dently must have extended not quite to the bottom. This 
impressive circumstance would have easily lent itself to 
various symbolic interpretations by the early preachers. 
Perhaps the one most naturally suggested by the context 
is that since Jesus, in connection with the expectation of 
his execution by the priests and rabbis had predicted the 
destruction of the temple, so now at the time of his 
execution this destruction began, and by an act of God. 


392 Tus Lirge anp TEACHING OF i | 


The tearing in two of this beautiful curtain, so much 
admired by Jews (p. 25), marked the indignant de- 
parture of God and the beginning of the desolation so 
soon to follow. 

When the Roman officer in charge of the execution saw 
the impressive circumstances connected with Jesus’ death, 
the awesome darkness and the great cry, he exclaimed 
“Surely this man was a son of a god.” He had heard 
the Jews about the cross saying that Jesus claimed to be 
“the Son of God.” In ignorance of the Jewish Messianic 
meaning of the title he used it in the common Roman 
sense: Jesus on an heroic being who must have had a 
divine ancestor.’ 

The death of Jesus was witnessed by a large group of 
women looking on from a safe distance. Three of them 
are named as persons evidently well known among the 
early Christians. One of the three, Salome, may have 
been the mother of James and John (Mt.). According to 
Luke many men also were with them. The women are 
described as those who had “ministered” to him in Galilee 
and had come up with him to Jerusalem for the same 
purpose (Mt.). This ministry probably consisted in pay- 
ing, in whole or in part, the expenses of Jesus’ visit to 
Jerusalem. At an earlier time in Galilee, women who had 
been cured by Jesus expressed their gratitude by such 
contributions.?* 

According to the Gospel of John, at some time during 
the crucifixion a group of women, including Jesus’ mother, 
came up within speaking distance of the cross. ‘The 
disciple whom Jesus loved” was also with them, and to 


* Luke makes the officer call Jesus “a righteous man.” Of. also 
Acts III:14. 

*Lk. VIII:1-3, “They ministered unto them (him) of their sub- 
stance,” 


Tur Execution or Jxsus 893 


him Jesus committed the care of his mother.1* As the 
women watched they saw the two crucified brigands 
hammered to death by the soldiers who could reach high 
enough from the ground to break their leg bones with 
heavy mallets. This action was a concession to the re- 
ligious scruples of the Jews who did not wish to have 
crucified men hanging on the cross on the Sabbath. The 
women, to their great relief, saw that Jesus was not 
treated in this way and judged that he was already 
dead.‘® Then all but two of them stole away to their 
lodgings. - 

The two who stayed behind very soon saw a dignified, 
well-dressed gentleman in consultation with the officer in 
charge of the execution.1® It was learned later that it 
was “Joseph of Arimathea,” a wealthy member of the 
Great Court living in a town a few miles from Jerusalem. 
Perhaps because he did not live in the city he had not been 
summoned to the night session of the court and had not 
taken part in the trial of Jesus. He did not approve of 
the verdict. He is described as one who “was expecting 
the Kingdom of God” soon to appear, and had, therefore, 
been influenced by the preaching of John the Baptist and 
Jesus. Either openly or in the secrecy of his own heart 
he was a “disciple” of Jesus (Mt.). He had come up 
from Arimathza and soon found his way to the scene of the 
crucifixion. When he saw that Jesus was dead he went 
at once to Pilate’s office to get a requisition for the body, 
which he proposed to bury. This was a bold act (Mk.) 
because the procurator might have decided to arrest some 
of Jesus’ party, and the sanhedrin would certainly make 
it very uncomfortable for any member of the court that 

4 Jn. XIX :25-27. 


% Jn. XIX :31-33. 
* Mk. XV :42-47, Mt. XXVII:67-61, Lk. XXIII:50-56. 


394 Tun Lire anp TEACHING oF JESUS 


opposed their action.17 Pilate could not believe that a 
crucified man could have died so soon. He perhaps sus- 
pected that Jesus’ friends were plotting to rescue him from 
the cross and secretly nurse him back to health. -He ac- 
cordingly refused to issue the order until the officer in 
charge had assured him that Jesus was undoubtedly dead. 

Joseph bought a fine linen burial cloth at a bazaar, took 
the body of Jesus down from the cross, wrapped it tenderly 
in the fine linen and carried it, perhaps with the help of 
his servants, to a new unused burial chamber (his own, 
Mt.) quarried out of the rock. He rolled a heavy wheel- 
shaped stone across the low doorway of the rock chamber 
to protect the body from dogs or hostile human intruders. 
The two women watched while this was being done and 
then went away. It was too late in the day for them to 
think of caring for the body of Jesus in the way usual 
at burials.*® 

™ Perhaps, too, if the Passover was yet to be eaten that evening 
(p. 362) touching a corpse would prevent his taking part in the 
sacred supper. 

** According to the Gospel of John, Nicodemus, a prominent rabbi, 
joined Joseph in caring for the body of Jesus. The two men wrapped 
an astonishing weight of spices, brought by Nicodemus, in the burial 


linen. In John’s Gospel the women are not represented as wishing 
to prepare the body of Jesus for burial, 


CHAPTER XXXVIII 
THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


HE passionate message of the early Christian 
prophets and preachers, necessarily expressed in 
the terms of their own thought world, was that Jesus, 
who had been so unjustly executed by the ecclesiastical ma- 
chine, had been lifted by God out of Hades, the under- 
world of the dead, and set in the place of power at God’s 
right hand in the highest heaven. From this place of 
power he continually poured into the lives of his disciples 
still on earth the influence of the mighty Spirit of God, 
producing various experiences, especially in the cult meet- 
ing, called “gifts of the Spirit.” ‘Jesus of Nazareth, a 
man approved of God unto you... ye by the hand of 
lawless men did crucify and slay: whom God raised up 
having loosed the pangs (bonds) of death. . . . Neither 
was he left unto Hades. . . . This Jesus did God raise up 
whereof we all are witnesses. Being therefore by the right 
hand of God exalted and, having received of the Father 
the promise of the Holy Spirit, he hath poured forth 
this which ye do see and hear.” * 

On his way from the underworld up to the topmost 
heaven Jesus is represented to have stopped on earth for 
a short period in which he made himself known to his 
disciples. This revelation of himself transformed the 
bewilderment and bitter disappointment, occasioned by his 


* Acts 11:22, 24, 33. 
395 


396 Tue Lire AND TEACHING or JESUS 


execution, into triumphant hope and expectation of his 
soon coming again from heaven to earth to inaugu- 
rate the Messianic Age of the Kingdom of God. The 
“sifts of the Spirit,’ poured out in power from 
heaven, were the pledges and prophetic beginnings of the 
Messianic Age when the heavenly Spirit of God was ex- 
pected to have undisputed control over the lives of all 
men.” 

Regarding the nature and circumstances of Jesus’ 
peculiar contacts with his disciples on his way from the 
underworld to the highest. heaven there was probably a 
variety of views during the decades in which the Gospel 
material was being shaped by the usage of Christian 
preachers. There were different ideas as to what in gen- 
eral constituted a resurrection. ‘To some a resurrection 
meant the resuscitation of the very body laid in the grave 
or the passage of the soul into another similar flesh and 
bone body.* To some it seemed that such a body would 
very soon after its resurrection be transformed, in the case 
of the good into a glorious body and in the case of the 
bad into an inferior form.* Jews of the Alexandrian 
type expected no resurrection body at all, because death 
was an escape from all bodily form.® These different ideas 
of a “resurrection” were probably all represented among 
the multitude of Jews from various parts of the world who 
within a few weeks or months responded to the preaching 
of the apostles. ach one who believed in the resurrec- 
tion of Jesus believed its nature to have been whatever 
he understod a “resurrection” to mean. The real nature 
of the resurrection of Jesus was probably as much a 


*Ps. Solomon XVII:41-46; cf. Ephesians IV:8-13. 

* Jos. Ant, XVIII:1:3, War I1:8:14; II Mac. VII:11, 23, XIV:46. 

*Apoc. Baruch XLIX:1-L1:16. 

* Philo, On the World, III. So also the Essenes in Palestine, Jos. 
Wor I1:8:11. 


Tue Resurrection or JEsusS 397 


matter of speculation among Christians in the first days 
as it is now. 

This divergence of opinion regarding the nature of a 
resurrection tended in the course of time to produce dif- 
ferent accounts of what had actually happened in the 
case of Jesus’ resurrection. The need of precision and 
historical accuracy in such accounts was not acutely felt 
during this period because the presence of the “gifts of 
the Spirit” in the lives of those who joined the Jesus 
Messianic movement was to them convincing proof of 
his resurrection. Absorption in the expectation of his 
speedy return tended still further to make such precision 
seem unnecessary. They were all looking forward, not 
backward. It is not surprising, therefore, that there 
should be a considerable degree of difference in the Gospel 
accounts of what took place in the days immediately fol- 
lowing the execution of Jesus. 

Common to them all is the fact that the resurrection, 
whatever its nature and circumstances, was Jesus’ spiritual 
assurance to his disciples that he was proceeding with the 
Messianic program, with preparation for the establish- 
ment on earth of God’s will for the life of man. Excep- 
tion is sometimes taken to the fact that evidence of Jesus’ 
resurrection was‘given, according to most accounts, to no 
one outside the circle of disciples. But there was no oc- 
easion to prove to outsiders that he was still in existence. 
Searcely anyone except the Sadducees doubted the con- 
tinued existence of the dead in Hades. The only thing 
‘that the first preachers felt the necessity of proving to 
outsiders was the continuance of Jesus’ power as a Mes- 
sianic leader to work on human life for the establishment 
of the will of God. This they considered to be proved 
by the experience of the disciples as they felt and mani- 
fested the daily effects of “the Spirit”? which, they as- 


398 Tue Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


serted, Jesus had promised to send them from heaven. 
The “appearances” of Jesus were important as marking 
the inauguration of this heavenly influence, but they were 
not the main thing. The main thing was the evidence of - 
Jesus’ permanent connection with the life of his disciples 
after the resurrection appearances. If this evidence had 
been lacking, the beginning and maintenance of the Chris- 
tian movement would apparently have been impossible. 
This evidence consisted partly in certain conspicuous emo- 
tional upheavals natural to the temperament, pre-suppo- 
sitions and religious fashions of the time, but more 
fundamentally in the profoundly satisfactory beginnings 
of ethical success—“love, joy, peace, long suffering, kind- 
ness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control.” ° 
Turning now to the Gospel records it appears that 
according to all the first three Gospels it was women who 
first visited the grave chamber and found it empty. These 
women were two named Mary, Salome (Mk.) and Joanna 
(Lk.). Late Friday afternoon they had seen from a 
distance the body of Jesus placed in a grave chamber. 
Twenty-four hours later in the evening of Saturday, when 
the Jewish Sabbath had just come to its end, they bought 
spices in the market hoping that the corpse would still be 
in such condition early the next morning that they could 
give it the affectionate anointing customary at burials. 
They reached the tomb at sunrise after wondering on the 
way how they could roll back the heavy stone that they 
had seen rolled across the low entrance Friday evening. 
To their amazement they found the stone rolled back. 
When they stooped and entered the chamber they found 
no corpse there. While they were for a moment uncertain 
whether friendly or unfriendly hands might have re- 
moved the body, they saw a young man wearing a long 
Gal. V:22, cf. Acts IV:32-35. 


Tue ResurrEecTion or JzEsus 399 


white cloak, sitting at their right on the narrow ledge of 
rock that ran round the room (two men standing, Lk.). 
He at once urged them not to be afraid, said that he 
knew they were looking for “Jesus, the crucified 
Nazarene,” that he had risen and that they could see 
simply the place where his body had lain. Furthermore 
he told them to tell the disciples of Jesus, and especially 
Peter (Mk.), that they must go north to Galilee, where 
Jesus would have preceded them and would meet them as 
he had previously promised. Luke’s Gospel, which had con- 
tained no such promise,’ omits at this point the command 
to go north, and gives no hint either in the Gospel or 
Acts of a meeting in Galilee. The appearances he re 
cords seem all to have been in or about Jerusalem; the 
disciples were even commanded not to depart from Jeru- 
salem. 

The women instantly left the grave chamber and fled 
from the spot in fear (also with joy, Mt.), intending to 
carry the word to the disciples (Mt.). The Gospel of 
Mark stops abruptly at this point with the statement that 
“they said nothing to anyone for they were afraid.” ® 
It is sometimes maintained that the Gospel was intended 
to end at this point. It is, however, unusual for a Greek 
sentence to end with a conjunction (“gar”), as would then 
be the case.® 

Among the reasons for thinking that verses 9-20 were 
not originally a part of the Gospel are their omission in 
certain old manuscripts and translations and their failure 
to carry on the interesting narrative begun in the verses 
just preceding. They contain simply a bare catalogue 


TOf. Lk. XXII:39-40 with Mk. XIV:28, Mt. XXVI:32. 

®* Possibly “afraid of” for the Greek word might be translated 
either way. In this latter case the Gospel would break off in the 
middle of a sentence. 

*It sometimes does so end, e.g., Is. XXIX:11, Septuagint. 


400 Tue Lirk anp TEACHING. oF JESUS 


of appearances of Jesus, including no mention of an ap- 
pearance in Galilee that had been promised in v. 7 and 
that we find in the Matthew narrative.*° According to 
the Matthew narrative the women, on their way from the 
tomb to the disciples, met Jesus himself, clasped his feet 
in worship and received from him a message to the dis- 
ciples to meet him in Galilee. At once the eleven disciples 
went to a place in the Galilean hill country which had 
been specified by Jesus. When they saw him there they 
worshiped, or made obeisance to him, “but some doubted.” 
The narrative gives no information as to who doubted or 
as to how these doubts were removed, but proceeds at once 
to give Jesus’ command to make disciples among all na- 
tions of the world. The account reads like a very con- 
densed statement (such as is characteristic of the Mat- 
thew narrative in general) of the conviction that formed 
itself in the hearts of the disciples during these first days 
of special contact with the Spirit of Jesus, regarding their 
Messianic Lord’s will to prepare men for the coming King- 
dom through their preaching. Their extreme unreadiness 
at once to obey this command appears in the Acts where 
they stay in Jerusalem until forced out by synagogue 
persecution. This unreadiness might well have been due 

Mt. XXVIII: 16-20. “The Matthew account of the women’s visit 
to the tomb represents the person whom the women found at the 
grave to have been “an angel of the Lord.” The grave had been 
opened by an earthquake; the angel of the Lord had rolled away 
the stone and was sitting on it in lightning-like majesty when the 
women arrived. It is further said that the guard, granted by Pilate 
at the request of the Jewish leaders, saw the angel roll away the 
stone and that some of them ran in terror to report it to the 
Jewish leaders. These leaders, against whom the Matthew Gospel 
all the way through has had a pronounced feeling, it now represents 
to have bribed the guard to say nothing about what they had seen 
and to report that while they were asleep the disciples of Jesus stole 


his body, a story said to be still current among Jewish antagonists 
of Christianity at the time when the Matthew Gospel was compiled. 


Tur RESURRECTION oF JESUS 401 


to the feeling that it was useless to go to other nations with 
the declaration of Jesus’ Messiahship until his own na- 
tion had first been convinced. The injunction here in 
Matthew to teach their converts to keep all the things 
that Jesus had commanded them included the Mosaic 
law,'4 and shows that in the circle which produced the 
Matthew Gospel Jesus was understood to have planned 
the incorporation of all Gentile converts into a law keep- 
ing Jewish nation convinced of his Messiahship. Such 
a view was a natural one for Jewish Christians to hold 
even as late as the sixties or seventies. The baptismal 
formula, “unto the name of the Father, and the Son, and 
the Holy Spirit,” seems unnatural on the lips of Jesus. 
There is, however, no reason to suppose that it may not 
have been an established formula among Christian 
preachers even as early as the fifties,‘? and so have na- 
turally been attributed to Jesus at the time when the ee 
thew Gospel was compiled. 

The Lukan accounts of Jesus’ interviews with yah 
after his death represent them to have occurred in and 
about Jerusalem. It is implied that the women did not 
see Jesus (contrary to Mt.) although they were first to 
discover the empty grave.1® The ones who saw Jesus were 
two friends walking in the country, Peter, and a group 
of disciples including the eleven. All three of these ap- 
pearances occurred during the day in which the tomb was 
found to be empty.1* The story of Cleopas and his un- 
named friend walking in the country has about it the same 
beautiful atmosphere that characterizes another country 
scene found also only in Luke, his story of the angels’ 


=Mt. V:18-20. 

Of. II Cor, XIII:14. 
@Lk, XXIV :22-24. 
“Lk. XXIV:13-15. 


402 Tur Lire anp TEACHING OF JESUS 


songs and the shepherds’ joy in the Bethlehem fields at 
the birth of Jesus. , 

The experience of the two men is described with an 
interesting fulness of detail, that does not characterize 
any other account of the resurrection found in Luke or 
either of the other two Synoptic Gospels. Luke seems to 
have put into it, or found in it if it was in his source, 
a satisfactory exposition of what seemed to him to be the 
real meaning of the resurrection. Two Jewish patriots 
in great sadness of spirit. were earnestly talking as they 
walked along a country road in the afternoon. They had 
been attracted to Jesus because they had regarded him 
as one who would soon begin a revolutionary movement 
of a high type, leading to national righteousness and politi- 
cal liberty. They had hoped that “it was he that should 
redeem Israel.” A stranger joined them and asked what 
they were discussing so earnestly. They stopped to tell 
him: ‘they stood still looking sad.” They described to 
him the brilliant career of Jesus as a healer and popular 
teacher, a “prophet mighty in deed and word before God 
and all the people.” They told him the sad story of the 
execution by the ecclesiastical machine, “the chief priests 
and our rulers.”’ They also told him the strange story of 
the tomb found empty that morning by the women and of 
their vision of angels reporting him alive. Then the 
stranger, in a kindling way, began to argue that they ought 
to have expected the national deliverer, promised by God 
to his people, to die and afterward to enter into the glory 
of the New Age. He cited many statements in the He 
brew scriptures that they ought to have understood to teach 
this strange unrecognized truth. As they walked on listen- 
ing to him they came to their village home and hospitably 
urged him to be’their guest since night was drawing on. 
He accepted their invitation, but when food was served 


Tue Resurrection or JEsus 403 


suddenly assumed the rile of host, “took the bread and 
blessed it and breaking it gave to them.” Instantly they 
knew him and he “vanished out of their sight.” -They 
at once spoke to each other about the peculiar exhilaration 
of spirit felt by them as they had listened to the stranger’s 
explanation of the scriptures, apparently an experience 
that had frequently occurred in their intercourse with 
Jesus: “Was not our heart burning within us while he 
spake to us in the way, while he opened to us the scrip- 
tures?’ They immediately in early evening hurried back 
to Jerusalem. There they found the eleven and others 
with them. It is assumed in the narrative that they were 
not scattered but were assembled in some place known to 
the two. Before the two could tell their story about Jesus 
being “known of them in the breaking of bread,” 7° 
they were greeted with the cry that Peter had seen Jesus. 
Then they told their story and while the others were 
intently listening to it, Jesus suddenly “stood in the midst 
of them.” They were frightened because they thought 
they saw a spirit. Jesus quieted their fears by showing 
them his hands and feet (probably thought of as marked 
by crucifixion wounds) and by eating a piece of broiled 
fish, all to prove the reality of his flesh and bone pres- 
ence.’® He pointed out to them, as he had done to the 
two in the afternoon, statements in the scriptures fore- 
telling, as no rabbi had recognized, the death and resurrec- 
tion of the Messiah. The early Christian preachers based 


* The double emphasis on “the breaking of the bread” as the act 
in which Jesus was revealed (vs. 30, 35) suggests that at the 
Lord’s supper in early church life, there was probably unusual activ- 
ity among those who possessed “gifts of the spirit.” Such “gifts” 
were thought of as coming from Jesus, Acts I1:33. 

* This narrative assumes the resuscitation of the flesh and bone 
body. So also does the Acts narrative (II:27, 31). Perhaps the 
ultimate condition of the body of Jesus was thought of as in the 
Apoe. of Baruch (p. 396). 


404 Tue Lire anp Traonrne or JEsvs 


their arguments on such passages.*7 Jesus then outlined 
a career of world wide preaching of repentance and for- 
giveness beginning at Jerusalem where he commanded 
them to stay until he had reached heaven and sent back 
to them the Spirit. Then he led them out of the city to 
the Bethany suburb and, as his hands were extended over 
them in blessing and his lips moving in prayer for them, 
he was lifted out of their sight into heaven. 

The oldest list of Jesus’ appearances to his disciples is 
that given by Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians,!® 
written in the fifties and reporting what was believed by 
Christians at the time when he became a Christian, a short 
time after the death of Jesus. In this list an appearance 
to Peter comes first: “then to the twelve; then he appeared 
to above five hundred brothers at once”—most of them 
known to be still living in Paul’s day. “Then he appeared 
to James; then to all the apostles.” Women are not men- 
tioned in Paul’s account. In the Gospel accounts, too, 
the connection of women with the event is chiefly as dis- 
coverers of the empty tomb and messengers to the disciples 
rather than as witnesses of Jesus himself.?® 

What shall we say actually happened in these experi- 
ences that the disciples are reported to have had with Jesus 
after his death? There may well have been a degree of 
idealization, some exercise of a devout imagination, espe- 
cially in the only long resurrection narrative found in the 
first three Gospels, the one describing the experience of the 
two men walking in the country. This seems especially 
probable in the case of an author who shows such tendency 
to idealization as appears in the early chapters of Luke’s 


"#H.g., Acts II, II, XVIT:2-3. 

*XV:5-7. 

* Mt. alone represents women to have seen him. In the late end- 
ing of Mk. and in John’s Gospel, one woman, Mary Magdalene, sees 
him. 


Tut RESURRECTION OF JESUS 405 


Gospel, whether the songs and visions there recorded be his 
own creation or selection. But this supposition of a degree 
of idealization does not at all account for the great central 
fact. The central fact is that something happened which 
convinced the disciples that Jesus did not remain in the 
underworld where the dead were supposed to await the 
resurrection, but was instead lifted up by God to be Lord 
of all in the heavens. It would have been natural for 
the disciples, after they saw that God did not send Elijah 
to help Jesus on the cross, nor in any other way deliver 
him from being swallowed up in death, to suppose that he 
had joined the long succession of martyr prophets. Or 
if they went further and still believed that the Spirit of 
the heavenly Son of Man had been in him, they would 
naturally have settled down to wait for his emergence 
from the underworld in the general resurrection, whenever 
that might occur. But this was not what they did. 
Something happened that was decisive enough to change 
their disappointment into enthusiasm, to take their 
thought decisively and suddenly from the underworld to 
the highest heaven. That which is reported to have ef- _ 
fected this change is certain experiences with Jesus him- 
self. On the supposition that this did actually happen, 
did these experiences involve an appearance of Jesus that 
could have been recorded by a camera, such words of 
Jesus as could have been registered by a dictograph? This 
seems to be a wholly minor matter. The highest personal 
reality is not necessarily recorded by camera and dicto- 
graph. It seems necessary to say that the personality of 
Jesus was present with such force as decisively to con- 
vince his disciples that he was with them and would con- 
tinue to work with them as the leader appointed by God 
to establish righteousness in the life of man on earth./The 
great convictions that arose in their souls out of such an 


406 Tur Lire anp TEAcHING oF JESUS 


experience seemed to them, and were, the voice of their 
living Lord. They began then and there with new and 
clarified devotion to adopt at any personal cost the simple 
fundamental, religious and ethical ideals of Jesus: prayer 
to the heavenly Father, an invincible generous good will 
to men, expectation of an everlasting life in the Coming 
Kingdom of God. These were traditional Jewish ideals 
emphasized by Jesus. That which constituted them 
pioneers of a new epoch in the history of man, was the 
fact that they let their affections follow Jesus as Lord 
and Leader out into the unseen world of the living God. 
They conceived him to be continuing a profound experi- 
ence with the will of God while he was still remaining in 
the sphere of human relationships. They reached out in 
spirit to take such share in his experience as he had always 
seemed patiently eager during his days on earth to accord 
them. In response to such outreach there rose within 
them out of the unseen world a tide of moral incentive that 
gave them victorious sense of the beginnings of an ever- 
lasting ethical success. Through the Christian centuries 
the repetition of the essential features of their experience, 
varying in superficial details with the unfolding life of. 
mankind, underlies the conviction that Jesus of Nazareth 
is the living Lord and active Savior of the world. 


INDEX TO REFERENCES 


Genesis I Samuel 
ae Pe: ee ee) ee 68 VLE 54022 Fo aa we nie as 40 
"3S bap ya Re ae dee aga pe) Se 245 | IIT Samuel 
> 0,14 BEY ae are rarer re 196 VLE LEM ee sraiaachou danas 43 
Exodus II Kumgs 
ETA2G6 Fs eerie eee ae 327 PORE sree Buck obice molare aus. 62 
WV 2 OB ook ee os ea ie 43 DVis 42044 ayo nc aie) & ats trae 203 
BU ALLE SIG) os cee ce *,.. 355 | IT Chronicles 
» PCY URN Ee re, 325 »D.G NED eGo ae et Y 335 
ADVE bee ag oe 359 OBE BR ice DCR! ELLE Bae ere, 272 
2D, Ee Sate es ape r r * 273 | Psalms 
Leviticus NA Ed aril aieh agile, drecle @teueiecs 388 
ATITORTV Oost oe aay 93 eal Rae h=eaeeny o gaat wialordy eaten 239 
Ved O-30 3 e8b skies wane 133 NURS ZS ieee ia coer Shara , 389 
MTR TAB yay ceeeee 328 N 8 BGAN Cn aii i Nae aaa A ah 385 
Numbers TUR RERAZG 27 oo cis si omits 43 
WISI D ein cs ames ee 61 Oe ee i cies ais: a) aetion Miorks 329 
AN OL s4aLo 22 bes ee eee 27 OXTT-COX VIN so. eldavets 356 
LA Te) (Aes a a kt Tee 297 VE TREE rs eco elanscaie to oe 315 
Deuteronomy CT So LLM 8 state oka secatstia oa 356 
BOD oss eds eR Eek es 72 | Isaiah ‘i 
Ws iaso 2 Cee eee te ee 72 IVE Be Ts, Big, wale iat es aa: alia 314 
5 dh SE leit Nn eae ag 27 PV De ak IN. ti cst etal en oy Rictele 189 
LAE cen ot et ea ee 328 WET ASL 5 oe ss sci ats Whe ote 316 
‘1a OS ER Aes tila aan ee 72 Dg Ba ue oinericeicnrc) 76 
‘i Ast 1: tiple or edeleeleme bese 72 SAAN TLS ENT satel bie ve Bnet 231 
“GUNS C2) Bnei Ae 74 | XXIK11 ............ 399 
VEE) ee ee 8 72 | XXXV:5-6 .......0.. 67, 214 
BOO Gs ee 73 Vibe fo cee ctlbesias eters 8 bas Rc gPENS 312 
IX : 11 Pe Ne niwieed 73 LX 24-9 fe)! Wyle 6 8) Bho lee) oene eRe 353 
1x i 18 ao alee 73 LXI : ] S Stale Shevake tel pie ehel ese tele 67 
SNe ROAST Gea ay, A Oi ERE SLO oa eh edie ee cue 140 
> DALAT RO ae eo 74 : ia 
XI:13-21 27 Jeremiah 
Ue” AL eS Bae Cases VD Te ol th aiicren ak saline ee 312 
CVD ae oles Fs ER 203 UIT SINS Nie ee 272 
PC VALLES ID Peirce ere FE 231 aa Sena e | uke 360 
XXT:3 oe 297 Met a eae 144 
DAS CRUG be 8 gle doin Rn RON 20 Li 217 Daniel 
REV 2-0 tsetse e tian e 326 ATU arte AT a ah eo Soa NR 43 
Joshua Hosea 
At - RI OR te toeiRe ee Pa) Ae 272 ES ARS EE ad pe a a rae 237 
ENE Oa. Abs See at ee 144 PARE EARN nee CEE Ne be ed ee 43 


408 InpEx To RererENncrs 


Amos We Deo ye cee ass hoe 163 
VRE Ors oa ic hsncuahe Sera ne 388 VU 24-7 ierse ade oo 19 
Micah VEPIB eh Gp ates oe eee 163 
ME Be Gos oN Rett. Puwunuce 56 VE PSR as eet eee 16 
Zechariah VES568 us ow ce dle oe 163, 164 
TSE Og Si Pe 298 Vii OlSoQntt Bice see 165 
MESI2- Dake wal te eee 350 ViieiGsls irene yi. 19, 163, 164 
SBM EET: Sra Trg al et oe Sy 61 i ral let a eee 180 
MPLS. cakes con ee een 366 VEsOae i bs eae ie 160 
Malach ViLISS-3D i pied td cies cette 302 
PTET ori aca tae cet nrete 76 ViPS 26- 34070 Chios, 158, 162 
PVD O eee aes oe 62, 259 VES es Cfo Deh ans yee 159 
Matthew VisBleaoa . Lee eu Son 56, 76 
181 Marae ne es RST RID cap 51 ae Ae Se 174 
ATT So ee oe aay Co eee 62 YLT Goh tee eee 19 
TERPS) Oe a See 16 VETS 7-8! tae dhe tee 156 
1 MAA CO inp Mem A Oe Fig ey odeguallal ts A 62 Vids ld saree cen sears 156 
WY Ed Bi cornea leh dl eer ghiinicmr ob ve 64 i ef areas Ge erly gene & 169 
TESTS yy ee ae ar ea 62 VITs laste nau) ears 170 
APRA Bs So TA MINS 66 VIT2 16-23 tb eh Seems 343 
bs takai elds Th Aah ey ANA 73 VIT:2U2S ye ee eee 197, 319 
TVs Eee die aie ae 302 MITT 4-4 yr les PAS ee 3 
PV 02 TA) 7 eB a Ae Ae 119 WIT: B13) cee 86, 95 
bE ts ed eh ea oneladlge ep 2 9!) hae 28 VATE 779s Peer eee ee 247 
VEVIE tone SON ene 150 VITESl6. (usher. Gaeeere See 84 
NA EY PR ge Baek BS OPEL gm tr lh Se nici ViLTi 219-20 +42 32d 28 hoe 185 
GEE ie Maret aie perpen trashing Ah ndtirs 180 VULT So U 2 ereee eeee 184 
VB TBs op ae aee eas. Fe 170 NALD QO fe es 8, eee 87 
Vee S Cie oe eae eon 180 UX. ons « ate eee 102, 103 
CO st terse ar ee ices aces 152 me «PRET ieee caer teres 149 
Wis ES) PA oie tae Sin Wiig 171 De eae 1 Rb teh a cere 142 
A DT EE a Mk Meee LT adi had 172 DO EERE Bee gt weed! 2! 18 
Vv STs ee eee 316, 318 DB S1G-42) FP ere ee 146 
UTS A Fete A Ret aR SEY ait 14 DS = Wn Be Ree Ltr 7,7 250 
Vd Re TO ie Nee 9 xh mi 18, 328 Sb yd bbe wigacl a eee e ee 145 
V sa Be Ay ee Fee eee 401 bb 7: sy ae ies iaierabag e. 2.5 B 184 
V:19 14, 15, 197, 274, 319, 343 OR EU SEh i cs aeadebtae ch dealt glo cateh ae 56 
DREAD RED Ps ei BA dl 16 KS ODS Oui, cas ciarn ale a chee 145 
RO PEO end go Ne en ae 172 eee ae ake ath aye ane 81 
VETS Tw Fee ee ley et eae 151 BO GPE | nar MA ae.” 67, 226 
NV, 2 RNAS PAN NR & 6 a ee 19 BG Eb MRI ae ae" 84, 248 
i As TR AU I i pe 173 AL OeU Li. eeeaks eee! 247 
ets or 41 SPN Aaa one nba: 173 ALslly.. ccs eas oe eee ee 314 
by ar Bn Pie a 173 Mise oc dsc ay eee eee 61 
DY ae ere Le ae ee 276, 278 De TS ce are wae cen 314 
V SORO 7) Sethe e o28 19, 153, 173 mle ess Ce ane 58 
Nims eaere' nn cate w the a eee 174 25227 Cs cat ce ee 302 
Vid S48 OR pees 302 PS by EP oe age iad Th | 306 
Ae CY Ee eapea genau ONE A A TRS Wh chk LAB BOr oie cee eae 303 
M SES eS PSO orate now TBS POETS 28:30 70 Soro ere 171 
VI:1 eoeereem eee eee eeeenv 08 169 - XT :29 e®eeceeveooe ee eevee es 806 


InpEx TO REFERENCES 409 


ee OS atic ph ans 89 
ALD SSB yale « deterea eats 248 
BR LES ASS thc ee oe 87 
eS 48-S5 res aa tae 152 
b.@ 8 et 5 eA ee ere 217 
DP. @ 8 1 Pete WrMi ee. . 4!) oe 195 
LEE SO oy alice pele es 319 
0 Ty ee 248, 319, 343 
bead ssa. ootls ae 248 
RELL <55* eis'o5a oe oe eee 56 
MULT G5-56) cs esac eee ee 55 
AM Se Lee ode nwo 200 
LV sBR-20 le irs ata re 17 
SU Rg & eter Bice ay aig cr 225 
SRV PLB EG. Yoen ares. sel ema tee 14 
SMW ILO chavghat ee gravehe siuue ca oe 17 
POV EDO Ce ch esky alee ate 14, 123 
OR Vito OS biel ees 212 
DOV deere iy aera, ate Ceere 149 
Oe Ve ee Soke ee ee 217 
VO eee ee 219 
OV P2021 0 oe diate 202 
AVES -18 sat ee wee 
OW Ed Oe bathe Cle Male aeeeie 223 
RV aes Sos a's See area 62 
2 A Ty 3 a eee 230 
OV Pele er eee ats 17 
VT BP ee tel Oe. hs 265 
RV Utes ce i oueeae'n ots eat 242 
VELL oe eee ee 257 
AVITTIO-13 Ors 8 see 259 
VALS oe ae 160 
OV LE Sa aye oy) eee 17 
VL 24-87 wie hols er et 273 
MVIh 1-4 yey ae 170, 268 
OV ITT Beco eee 266 
POV ELL LB ech. sa eae 174 
MOVIL I BUF doi eck ee 175 
MVTU SIAN et sce 103, 232 
VILE 3 9-20 he ee. ae 304 
VEL 2 ee tak, ae 17, 268 
B66 98 EA Dy A te ek ag 174 
Do WHI OE ee 8 176 
PVE 25-248 eo oe ey 176 
RO aie ee le ee 173, 278 
EN 10-12 oe ek oe 279 
MTR 16-300. So ou PS 281 
are Lert as et Fi Seas 352 
XIX:28 ..... 15, 117, 143, 231 
ER 2R-BO a io ca eee 286 
XIX :30-XX:16 ....... .. 287 


RN tL Git cies ait ee ee 57 
ROG Taig wid ewe nile a aus 350 
fe Ua NW BP MR PA sl 343 
as WR A ined par ae ad 290 
KPa SEAN WH Cis ieiuig. ta Wine de e's Soe ote 267 
MR OO 28 4 es abet eaes 290 
OR 29-34. ewes abt ee a 292 
SR Oye sg CP Cea 296 
LED. ce ates alate 296 
ARTs LORD Ae ei ais ee ons 298 
ROL Laie ies vivian Beate Beats 198 
ARS 18-22 56 oi eae eo fas 320 
XRT eB BeSE cial. ocaeeeweate ae 316 
2 Be TS ee ie 4 Sapa eh dt 288 
188-46 ote tee hele 314 
SO ORY CME RETR ad 15, 316 
DG OR FN A IRA Ts ae fe 317 
2.90. BHR TOA eh gf Sate Vik ht 319 
GW TED Bp ES Ks De ioe Bae 197 
OAL kee (iva sete ane wane 319 
ARIE 15122 3 ae ey 323 
MALES 23-33) Seka see ohars 326 
MITE SO eer eo ake 279 
OWL 8440 Oe ae es ee 328 
WALES SA-3e cues sre 1G 154 
RR a lis wicte alata ets 344 
BD 0) AT: 9 RO SC en 329 
PE PED testy cnatanecena beset 163, 332 
PLL 2S Wide d gape sie aes ] 

DOLL Le flor Mees array ae menue 36 
WRIT 4-3 gee ee a 333 
CULL ED iuiguiyis oo tae hie comee 332 
AMI 7 D-10 0 dea oe ee 332 
SOCLIT  S-100. oss 19, 333 
PULLS SLAM Uo oes be 169 
AA TILULONG Gre Oak 232 
AM ALIESIG-22 toe eee ocak 332 
AXTLE 16-22) enero ee 19 
bo. 88 EL ® Rie aa 14, 32 
LLL ST Me cise needs one 318 
PSU Ma Ree eee 338 
DO ES Re ar en Date 345, 347 
XLV ise 2B Pes | ee 340 
DEV CLOn 12 ee Boies 343 
NEY SOO) ge eae te ve 15 
AAT V 226-28 5 Seve, ee 340 
RXEV COO wus 18, 20, 251 
PU Vie POPOL See el eats 245 
XD Vig 20-44 ke See 342 
RALV 284-39 Reid seo ere oie 251 
XXIV :45-51 ecrvesoeceoe 343 


410 Inprx to Rererences 


MAW SIFLS Sa ena ae 343 TY-TLE awk ANS oe bee 
Ve baa oe oa as 295, 345 ADcl-TIEs30  skcvia veo es 
ee VERO Al a eRe eae 345 UH CP FPR RPP ne 102, 
OV S146 oo we das 342, 347 REs1S-17 s ovacce ds Soe era 
WRN Ee LOWS i nana meyers SRetone 356 ATs 18419 cuciaaa cee eee 
XX V1E330-36. 20) Te 365 11: 18-22 -cccvey cae cee 
2. Gl Ee: Ve bes 399 TU 1Ss i eve raei Faso ees 
XV 1: 36-465.) eae 366 TLs28-119 56 law ete aoe 
MX VI: 47-56 °c. SE 370 he ee ey 111, 219, 275, 
MAY LOL oe oe — 363 LUT 8612 | 20s Fea 2 ee 
AAV ADS? hye ot cohen Sik VITS7-8 1d hAw One ees 
XX VI «57-682 SORE 374 HG Ee Pee ey 131, 210, 214, 
DCA. VID: 1-2) Bee 2 374 EIDE LO. Sed eed. eee 
XV ITEL 26 0 6 Ae 380 MAIL 12) y sti. bee ae ee oe 
AX VIE:9-10 2 Re 353 TIES 13419. 65s de eee 
AV ELS IG. s vesa cre chetbtone 381 PITS bisdcceaveseceens 
KON VEE 20-25 \ eae 16 TEP Br 10. dpcageteces Coma 
AV IL e eS). Lee 384 DIT 220.21 janie eee 119, 
KM VITSS2-56,.. 02.00.0028 385 D2 b sig aca nee be eee 
meV 11162-63355 20055 7, 389 MALS Oe a er eee 118,217; 
RAVI 57-61; '.. Seeks 393 TI1 223-30» data noe areee 
OX VILL E1LI-19;, See 16 RUD 27. eth 2s cede ee 
AX VITTS16-20) .). Cec ee 400 TIT 228-29 2 a eee 
RA VILIEI9 - 9 eee 18 EELISO |, eens oda « MORN ee 
RX VIIT19-20) oi 0e 2 231 III <31-36,).,.. 04... SOY, 
RX VILE 20 15, 316, 318 TIE:35 eee eeee. 286, 
Mark DVisiky coin) viet acest ee ee eee 
UES Co a eerie arial 2 99 EV 31-345... 00 Soe ees 
Ly Yee ear ar ear: eo ae BF) 61 EV 3378130 eee case eee 
LCL DURA a aban bb ME 61 TV :10-12 04% 188, 
MOTE ula tlan alike SRY Cee 54 1V 510217. eae 
Pele tea oe ciale te te eee eee 71 TV 238-19. cou eee 
1 i Siaieaetre ey «ee adic 76, 94 LV 2122 hs ea ee 
1 ES): hs A yh dee ee Oa 1 LV 32352600) oa eee 
YY | RA Mme enw g. ue Ke 91 TV 226-29) gun Cee ee 
B216-BY oo ek ae OD 265 TV230282 2S eee 
PST ee Cl eee eee 13 TV r3b-V-43 0 eee 126, 
Up's RO ey eRe Gb Dh 84 WV 28 oe eee 
Be re act Vana eeee eee 82 Y Sabot. es ye Caen 
Bie i. Oe Ly seins ee ae 87 bh. ¥ GRR Manes Ts )9 bo) 
DAF NRPS ies Race dtet 84, 139 MT ST-ha tie hate Oe 138, 
Bae et AE eran 13, 265 V8 Voc eae 
EsaU-ah cok Al le Wes 86 Veh Det Ce eee 
Bs Garde 5s he cick ee ee ee 76 Wis Teta uo. yeoman 138, 
DPC eae ei Ra Pay 2 (i 84, 102 ad Wey a be Roepe ee 0 | 
Te3b-38. (34 fh se asee ae 93 Ws ka ec kui aon eee 
DeaGrosn ss le sek te eee 100 Misla-1@6 3 Poe 
Da eae os old. ieee aR? 93 WE = 14-00 ee 199, 
1 SOR Um NE A bash obs od 94 Vi TT-29 1 is athe stiw aes 
43-45 oe aes 76 WL B00 ii ale ee Oe 
tO: Fs Ae A te 3 a 1l, 95 WE 530-44) 3s SEV OR 


InpEx To REFERENCES 411 


Woo) Roe ee here 200 Gs Bie idk). 1) a a a, 84 
BET FST, ERR SPAR EEG? 204 A SORA ce. oc a ag 270 
* ET TIM is PARE cee UN Ye, 207 PM a iis lel occ dle kat 144 
OL SB Bc56 5 chaos, csahurs ee 207 ED G2 9 Bd Ae SOAR iret 2) Se oe 271 
eee Ge: | 280 ERATOR iy art, Bale Beha 2iz 
MET eae ee en 121, 275 Re O meter erotics ids. slo. 0e 273 
1 EG EY CY RR a ty L 99, 121 Dare Papen a, 264, 275, 292, 339 
WED 22-4557... '5 MOLAR Na | 10 DCS | HO eee aa kA ot 8 
IP eRe ee os hei ate te 104 2 ASR EE Ie TR REG OA PRINS Ade 173 
WIEt6-18 uate eee 308 DR Le ie te gale Gm 276 
WE REIS io Giviclns cee 265 ARE ad Ol cic 6 ache eR are 280 
pial O° URS Sei 12, 14, 123 TO i el via an ttle 269 
RD EZ a a 123, 210, 339 DCS on DRS AI Bia Ng oe 281 
WLU 4-30 a a hora bo kn ee 210 2 CWA ALE Oe Canaan Nhe 269, 328 
VII:24-VIII:26 ......... 209 CHF Se ea | Me 284 
TAS aS Ueno aoe halla ete cote 131 Te NO yo iic/ piles waeie aighars 283 
VI t88 oy eds os ee 261 OR Bee ie nei k ee hare 289 
I da ek theca tare dat eeetee 214 BAe Vas Fa aes eo? 236, 290 
WILE ISO oc ie ee 218 92 Ly tis i OU OR ea AD DD 267 
VIII:17-21 ....., d's aioe 265 RM SB AU ian wk os a Pate uediers 223 
WET DSTO oy ao usd eerste 202 DOs SY. Ete Tie era Tea 290 
RL RSS ie ok a cis alin e oh ani 261 eA Dis Ce Aled eiclencto ava mahal 267 
WALL t22-26 ona sels ee 221 BORO WS 2hd ity 2h gl Ied 5 Yo a lteter g 291 
WALT SOT ee oe were e x oe ws. 102 248d os ced oes nein? 268 
VAETSO7-28 ck. c  « otek 89, 205 PAB Oe ale withe od alate 168 
VIII:27-30 11, 66, 89, 206, 222 CSR Hs TN ae Ay 11, 358 
VEIT 29-30 ok cg a Sane 6 ERIS ie tales cca teas oslo 8 292 
MELE SOI «os atco acs 11, 227, 252 POA PSV Se ota \aher ety 6 a eines: 2 abe 296 
VILESSL-SS. 0... ss oe 234 PM ee ROS EDs, cy. ca «a5 eh ehete alte 296 
Vill 31 -E xb. Warnes 257 Sy a a ae, Fe ate gic OOO 
WA TU SAe reuse ae & ates 241, 371 ee ee ns ik « wtb die 320 
VIIT=34-35 0 0 es nlee 168, 252 PRINS DOES a ac yicc a's. 9 ohio er 200 
WAIT 8S5°O6 0s wes ai3's eee 242 PRE SLB cela Weise cre wieisle Wane 312 
YG iD ye ae ari he BN 242, 253 ONS RY Sit G8 ete aa ad AS lo 312 
EA PAA ittaisin se. c aan 257, 267 STIR ES SPR GERRI natalie 313 
ERteeDUtee cates n> see, 257 24 IA UR MOU a ie a 310, 350 
PRR ee cece oe veGee Eb eOS AO stre es Siew ieih ste cuate's 320 
DR PUsE coins tea ee aa 238 A Ab RRA LG ieee AR ep 85 
PROBL acces otis ce wars aion 62 BR dre Aa aa ee LY. a ei a) are aie aiteks one 86 
DRL Sie. kk te ae ee 259 ol EAT he NOY al A a a 322 
DIST We otek ae 11, 239, 259 BU ee fear ticeeus wahee oh c ts 313 
DR Wa ete hae eas ea ler y el 261 B44 8 AUS, ge i Iaaet ee ANG ma 0 187 
LO. G41 UH Spee thes pocataguily any + 8 211 Lede h Omi ete se tite eke 314 
EX CON ie nA eee 85 8. GHEE ipl ydldhcly seas RR 15 
ERO econ mie chic an okie vale DN A Am ae NN s sela'y Nine, peek 4k 319 
1 RS EEA CVES 1 Ailes kA lb ae CENA Sea ae Pe LU sa ckedgpe Cos te tie coe eat 323 
Paes ode avai eat ll, 236 CELT, vionicin aevers ect ots 380 
Ly A ule aig Oh AWA Sek ph 280 DESIR leo oe ct 34, 327 
1D, ey MU i Rar A De EA oy Sy 269 AIT ?28-34 ook cece vedas G20 


412 InpEx TO REFERENCES 


TE se BOBO i cisns tote setetede es oie 154 1S EW ey SN i OT AON a tee LE ie 19, 60 
MET SSB-BT a aarti elerkae 329 BEE 87 th cca drcnmies Oe 
BLE SB8-39 beccsee dace 125, 185 TST vel 4 Moeleaees eee eae 63 
MET SSO MW coin ee 331 TET SR EBy ae cca scdint ns ota oeene 64 
EL SA Deh 4 ic eis iees toe Sha ate 336 PET PT Webi ccrmtoceidia wane eee 68 
PONE BE Wy cc.2 Geeta ah dated sfarsantintet ete 338 1D iy 4: CUS Nn tre apiaes 8) 60 
LEO ie cat tecaey 337, 338 BV tS, ok Gen aos jernte cee 73 
>. WEE Ss BCR er mie os 340 TV s6h Sab ed doco male eet 72 
OLE Shadow latte in a ees 27 EV ¢13)) cade sees Dae 79 
MULT AS4i5 caveanraeeeas 20, 251 UNM 216-20 6 cca ue 60 enters 58 
TEE 24-27 oe cighctniown ae cMaes 245 EV c1B-SO) . siicte tere eiptereten ne 140 
XIUIT:24-37 2... OMe A | 342 WV $28-10) Ai iets 140, 177 
LT eSB h odclal delate olBle etm 251 EV 222). oVPR Ei cae erate 19 
NTE 234-3878 bi asek sa Rees 343 18 45 CO a a AS 140, 187 
TV's LeBel ass i te’ 11, 349, 350 TV 26-272 vcs eeu kek ewe 18 
LV £y hal aly Win la telaiei oie deme 350 EV 240) ¢o.3 et eone dee a htt 84 
MD Wie LOMAS oe Josie atsicieieints 350 EV 242-480 65 S85 bod dsindhe ts 93 
MV S628) 5 bcc dieleteraes 365 Wedel) eer atersei es Ae 92 
EL Ve Se ices tela tel ota twining sete 399 Wis lQe16? fe coh aed, gee 93 
Vit Ge-42 Cb cena ne ae 366 VelVinye ssh Sacre eee 101, 275 
TY 243-68 iis aics vistas ees 370 OV OG isis 2 oe 82 OY ae ke 
Drad Bary: © Yarn LE Sram ries 7 371 WeBare ies urea 63, 165 
ORV 2S ri ett eielst etal ciel ant aueee 313 V's SB-S0 Gr io SOU ee ee 109 
CTV 453-GO0o eis. telewia’s wa ane 374 VISIO Pe yose Fe eee 117 
ES BG Teo ctaedh cle arate 1] Wis tecl Gece ee ee cee 142 
MLV tOS-O8) bec eee ee 337 VisZ0-25'" as Sowa ae ere . 180 
EV sh OS ores bate erotace ete ll VI:20-49 ....... PR ohm Std. 150 
We SES cigs Se a eae 313, 374 VT OR op oss oon es eee 169 
ee TsO TUT Srila tata ta tonebet aceon 380 VIESEALO Cer aes ae ae 95 
Te Gs bia ste siatatal tw chelesctecs 363 VET 86 ito CAN ee eee 46 
en Oe fo iatel al or eter ol harm meet ll WT TEL 30425 eee 136 
TNE Era ile prateratelemcararats 384 WS 2 Oe Sea oe tee eer 67 
9.004 oe 9 Rn eure 4: 385 VIS R28 ite ee ce ak ween 226 
We a Ot CRA Te ot ata ate 240 VIPS. 255 2 uae heen aes 248 
Te VTS athe edict sha avotohateremtar bate 337 ViPS O28 0. Se ce 247 
KOM Pea fit iors Sete areueelee 393 WTR eri eet Posen ee 68 
VAG iat reer ae sous 363 A'S LTE Y AbParr sry Petr.  " 158 
eV So abateihate steghere sane 366 WETS Lh three aa eos eee 19 
MVAIO-ZO uss dbsewe cls 13, 399 VT lB eee eee 392 
Luke VULES LG 7 6 Chea se 3, 193 
Bat is Ee yO Ry hei | ok eis 7 WLI 40 8. eee 19 
Wie beet Lier care cad tmerede a eee aes Pray gn 149 
DiGO The oneal ats eatin cme 61 EX tL SU dl ees oh cae eee 223 
Ba 9 es me pe a ae er age i La 61 TX 220-20 A a ee aalen 140 
TsSO et ea PPOs Oe Ee ree 61 TAAOL owe ots oak oe 242 
DER es ceo we Oe ee age 61 a A elgg easiest J baadiel OE 
Dee aieicce reece Payers | Pate vac cee tees cae 258 
SI Lee ees Bat al toes aaa 19 LA. t 40-85. 'etee ek aes cep se, BOO 
CU Vals le olelore ie tala i'd tle ohne ee RAL awe Vala eee parece aim) Wee 
TI:41-51 eeoecsnevrened ereee 54 IX: 51-55 eoveeeorenesese 143 


IT:51 err eee eee 54 IX :57 eeeereoeoeesee@gieonse 20 


Inpex To REFERENCES 4138 


EX s67-58.- otc weg ces 185 NS Oe A re BSC 158 
BX350-60 onion wi avyheees 184 Vis AOR ed ton i clisies ett 178 
Tl eh ey oe 20 VSO a os ok Sees heer 370 
MH tE-20.. 25. ibaeteaewy eg 147 VL Tere SG ee es fo 181 
Pet lTahO sc shed cindy See oe 76 PA VARs Lire ri ieee ey ae orale 160 
Bh orale in he are ten ee 302 OVE ST Parr a a siete lee vid 18 
A 25-28 i254 ais pane a 328 SA Vi 211 Bee ida atahaticla sera" 173, 278 
ALSO OE >| C5405 Sake 18 VES TRB LW pet ale ela 182 
M2728 + naa cue es 154 De VEL eS lee seks ote 174, 249 
R849 > vicarcicies Aer 177 DEV LIPS 20 ean oe eee 174 
MBB sens view beacon 20 ENV Lis Sis ule to get Sab oh 176 
ee BB 4D wan’ len keh 180 me VLESO I e's wieaie' eee See 160 
6 0) LEE eres .. 63, 165 DVL s eee eee 20 
D0 Oy a ae ee en 165 MOVED 1-19 Ox, he 18, 157 
Pl 5B cone his hed aaa 85 RVI 22387005 te ea 
XI:5 Bee utewieek y BP itvoete reees 178 XVII:23, 24, 26, 27, 34, 

PTI B Bien ces Vasc eee 157 O's Ohh else's © bearer a ale ty 38 
LO re sida aired Maine 248 OVER D LS see gierd sare oats 157 
LS OSD ascot bly Betay 217 VIEL DS LR Sai tererew i talents 108 
LEST D2) wi wen wary Vero 332 eV ALS TS- Td ey le oe 158 
OT GATS Mec heniwitran aiiatae 335 VEIT S-B0 iain inn otk 281 
+ 0 ED CRRR Sv eramre eam tt 219 POVIEI ES 134 Weve eae shares 290 
ERE TO ~ 5. oie ea evc er 87 VTE S DES on Ca ia 292 
PLES LBL nasche saverdhctete wavered 181: DLR ee LOEW Silay oh o's ote 292 
eA MOD SLB iss Vien cect hee rena 158 i, Gay DSL Me ann ba 250 
RT EEO BE hia ciate wAiw's we dates 162 9 08 Wy Re Pra ere 295 
PLES Bondy Mra erarshitetarerals Oba tatd 180 » 0 PEA Wo ESPs EP i ae 4 345 
BIER tS ako rercies ais 6) Perak 160 IRIS 26 aie oh Ves 338 
AES ae Olas sai ek ek iucesteny 338 AE NN RMB O WNcran’y Gin view bide ee 296 
ESE) py Sie vsscletinsei Miceate a 180 RDA TOE a ek wale ee 299 
DG EE VE OGn Ries. 5 02 338 REARS Rew hitle wea thew see 296 
ULE O0 ir ntaeicte arses eee 256 POLO aera gcoleman 314 
DG WETS ss 1 SR neni os 145 Men riaet Lesa dolar or bide: lhc alt iA MO 316 
PR TEE S25 Weiareteshccstiahesouiae’s 153 DON BO-26 sek iene 323 
MELT GeO PGs snahesner apsciore io ee 321 2D ER SOU a re BBL A 326 
CAPE SAO ab yf siacetamtatvenes ster lll PSD ee FO hese wp ontticle tiarth yale 326 
PRE SL We ae tee tavwhateltte 214 PEAR GISOOY. Wire nied Rohe Wy 279 
Ee iis soy wis o 4 hs 27 DEAS E ER wie sien eca da, vans 43 
AE BELG | voyecotescnckert-uletote ote 214 2 A re ae wg ee 329 
Se LEA OM a ooh ie mia sesso 170 ak ADAG his Che's Seater 331 
SPELL OL+SE ya buericteneine 220 DALE yuki sven Dee iets 336 
G08 ESPs fs Rae peeaeenn td oo. 237 PORE 2 2 eos og. cit eeaeeeae 340 
Siessae cr. as 19, 318 BGO EPL Ue cep GA Io 341 
EM STELD vious ib ielelin Feet 179 2 OEY TER A ee, Ae 20 
SAY © MRE een? | 178 NRE OAS aotars wokee site 245 
AMIEL LS OS caw oannioet te 169 XT 2H-SG taicter staal ges 338, 342 
RAG i. s, nso eae ees 184 PA Dehl SO une usiciete Aik. 251 
9 14 7s KER rey aBNS 3 LS 180 PLR PDS a cle ecadiv ya his caibtels 19 
DEV iets s o0h.a mayne ete 19 BOLTS Laie ook dave Ses 357 
ANG oh aoc eumieamas te 157 » 4) WES W (hb RE See 8 See 361 


414 


BOX TE S838 2 os pelle: 365 
RX IC 80 hc wae 117 
SNIT235, 38) 4,0 cca 371 
RXTE G40) 1s eee 399 
RIT OO-48 sp lak ee 366 
KIT 47-68 co 370 
OKIE! ly Gs eee 374 
XXII:66-XXIII:1 ...... 374 
MND: 1-05 <n sicen a MAR 380 
NXULDGCL ccc ce wee 324 
SNIUE 618 yah op ee 383 
DTT 90-40 yi oe vl 385 
NRG AOGE WGI DCNCLMNIiRR LA | 386 
MTT: 80-60, cebu 393 
MRIVG 131i) ys oe 401 
XXEV 22040. as ee, 401 
BOX T Ue B00 cso os sce 403 
MN TV ESAS osc lis Web eR be 403 
XT VAL lo a ae 20 
iO ees aN 21 
ELA: © ena TRS OTS 64 
Pel8 he oc eee 51 
PTA Ge ok ae 21 
M1920 Paki eae 64 
PORT ie 64 
i 29:9080 5... eae 64 
TRAD-AD i cy ae 91 
[7 MeL RUN ARON P98. 225 
BES ccc) yee 49 
WIG A a eRe 311 
TUE eT RE CO 33 
BU SB Uic ee ae 21 
TAL s26-20 (20. eee 64 
(TRG SRR impart oin k 280 
Wi bleh cau cadet 49 
Wiese shes sae eee 203 
Te Oe a 49, 200, 201 
1 Aes ER Fa cS Ne NG 0 

VE 95-89 |, wate: 201 
Mla S 1-89 ok ae 74 
MI s89-bS 0 0 ee 201 
MLCT Li ccd ee 257 
Mike eee be Oh eee 289 
MAT6 ce Pa 56, 139 
VDOT ey 289 
STB Oo Non 33 
VTL BS i ae 289 
cS ipa elven algi hs et 101 


InpEx To REFERENCES 


ee ica mdi ee 257 
DEO 3-57) 0.:5:0\5.5 aes 289 
OH CEs Ts Sane A ANE Sb 293 
RLS laine o eiuect aii Coats 267, 352 
1, 9 it Fa OR TA Ms I 363 
POLET 27530 oc caleneee 370 
XIII:29 ........267; 352, 362 
NIV 312-14 0 ee 

OO VSB ie ois ola) eae 339 
MV ESOS Ly, ca 339 
2.4 ' 9 TP: ye eA aR | 263 
DV ELD so csc sels is 366 
Me VILLAS Uo cle, caleaketa aie 370 
DM VIIL:S, 2. cy eee pene 372 
VI S13, 24 eee 374 
MV ITT 39-22) eee 374 
G8 AY Ra gen, 374 
Be Vee oe ce ands ee 49, 362 
VILE SI os eee 375 
MEK 2 12-16 os sic ee 382 
DOU 2.07. o's a.5 cue. eens ee ee 385 
DOL X 05 -OF eS ee 393 
NIX 231-33. nae lees 393 
DROOL Tos a4 bisects Ga ee 305 
+, © SEA UA A PO PIR RI 173, 305 
Bb TOCA Sia A Np 103, 305 
GR MM kb. ah lee urns hincale CR eee 

GR S24 ee 22 
1 NW th RRR rarer eee PAY. y 20 
Tel 3-14... ois dan oleae 142 
Pe 18st eo iad aebe,neees eee 353 
D2 BOF ic.) alse ead ae ee 143 
Oe oe a a al aaa ee 404 
Bt has ck sols mim emce dee 4,7 
ND Oe vd, cher epena Cae ae 395 
ee iw apo seneanaa ee ee 395 
9-7 Spas oer Aimar Ao 369, 403 
EN SU seve accuses seve acne 403 
1:33 .... 4, 20, 50, 395, 403 
UI 42. icici s es See 362 
EL 4G, a ses decade Rioae ete eee 362 
OS eave occ arse eta e CO 404 
ETT ASG ic teinace errs 382 
TET 4a cei eae 392 
TIT SIG. OY Clee oe eee 20 
M288 re Oe eee 203 
PT ee eee eee 73 
PV 8 Ser B0) oh oe Sick Ree 398 
DG MARAE E Mati b Man, piety ov en pt 33 
MISS; calc k me ekukine eer 215 


INDEX TO REFERENCES 415 


IMIS SL, punia Inte cache teat ener D are 391 2/9) Ry Ca ae vet Mabie 120, 188 
Pk 2S ee ee 376 220 ES BR POO SRE Vege a on 188 
Wisls-14 fC eee 337 B40 Ms Sd adh hig An age 341 
Ae ER Ee aE ce habe m3 14 PL SOG Og 8 ee Nts AEE 188 
POLL s coh ip coehetareteiasencrei ied oe 230 mG GH Sey es ieee 173 
Wil 248-50 i ree 14 LEY ED Vols tateiee tiie ave ane 341 
VII 64-58 Wee Gas 337 PELLETS ee csi es 250 
PATIO, ao. Posudey etree 259 >. BS Wf dace Tee Mee UR a 246 
BR OSS OT aoe cne ee 215 PG ik Bo 2D bY PU at ee 340 
TA 3340 . eee 20 ENN APY A BS ds Ua ua AS Sa ee mA 340 
DP AAD! cole ne cat Coss eee 46 A VES me ee eee ae 385 
Ee Best he ach boaterarete ce Mae 259 | I Corinthians 
UE LOFIG dc. Se tharos 259 1 BED A Soe Satiek pC einsar pee dea Me 2 65 
SLOSS Fae sy aiuidae aelaete 210 ME ee ee et Wak’ 103 
>. Ys |; POA rob OR 13 WW LL SoU al 279 
2 EK UOR PRS ats ORAM CROPS «3 Yee (7 210 VED Sb Gs ir Ot ius 1 
AIT 51-2... cK OD. ae 291 3.0 Gy 4s I EE, OSD, Raa te 362 
MITE odie. abeneke 13, 372 DT ORO dU ila Muli 1 
IT EQOs iiuiecioe Mek bate 209 OV ide 9 a Nad ie arg 237 
LET 1 BA es ow ber 4 KN 26-7) ie deities Bs ue 404 
TT Ee TB bed ic acssn ae ea 28 Ve OO SS ks Bie ie 44 
A VB leis nileincks Si atte ae 15 LO ef CA RARE Ra Aa 227, 330 
Vib kee Ge. ee 15 BV BO-62 i heey ane ill 245 
> Mg) 05 Os ee 2 rie re ey 46 | II Corinthians 
RVI1isT Berea: Fase 20 Drs BD Cis revi ten i ne Ay 1 
OO V.10-102 2icinciieskess ietoe 259 IVT Eine ceils aba te peal aw <b 1 
KV ULB a, ee |. aio 404 1328-28 cs ie eee 1 
VILLE O eas ies sisreks 20, 259 OU RA dpe) eo eae 388 
EMD MGA as cg icasbansiiveabel cine ihe a ik 64 > AUP ECO a RD ea Gh ae fea ALY 144 
3D CCR: Oo ETRE ONE AOR OE 2 84 2. 6H SO eee a ea! 18, 401 
RUA Gdeih in ites Rielwre bie ccte mene 362 | Galatians 
ASL 17 yee. Cas 20 18 Oh) Wh Bs Fe Ase ie ae 16, 232, 380 
5D. NEL 8 4° a PTE A: 319 ET re eth ety mater ay parks 
DEX DEL Bids heen eee 327 5 ATH SOS ICID RUD SA 367 
ER LEDs DG, cin ttc peelaateiane 20 SUEDE Is Ue RRS ips MI RT 398 
VSD ZG sins sie bre btn le ake 20 | Ephesians 
Re VCO LO ik cients te Stele ate 375 EV. SSL \aain eetataisl «tomers Ghai 396 
MOV LE SoA Chin tai eh whtbetehs 20 | Philippians 

Romans RE arias ete tala adie aielee akere 306 
Dp ab hig: RK bcs Woe va te eticle boat ah 1 TUB Oye ee tee 388 
he Se aeran Ure ers =use 8 330 | Colossians 
PE LGy sg ese Herein tees movle 212 EVLA rik PAG Wy a Le 20 
OS 7 eae ee aa ee 302 | I Thessalonians 
PVCS 6 Seca i ia ROS Nh 81 WE Vit FAs 20 ee go elie eee 173 
WET is ear Cah st itiaicl aha. RAPE ote 281 | II Thessalonians 
Wilh -o.daeeyckey Sees: 318 eGR Rea ss gk dition Cee 250 
METTSIG. cise Fees 367 EDs 1eTo a, See 249 
WELT 18-25 oie cs oka s 361 | JI Timothy 
jit). CR Ne leo 188, 249 Pe TB rae wie bg MIRE a 46 
PLES PIS. eb ween ees 340 | Hebrews 


416 
We eae e Ce ee wick eae kiero 369 
IVER Tele tatis aie) eel hk anes 256 
Wa SiO Gentes de acai lnata 49, 300 
REAL Lk Silils Set evietesint pia a) oxeneton 315 
I Peter 
PDS eek fescue atone a 387 
Jude 
BG estates Gles seoece Suaveconnivis eteine 347 
Revelation 
De Weis tad ask es ees . 22 
LE AERA Aste) braver anilets MAAR a 22 
TEDtZ0-2 bie. RA 5 
EAN Ltd Ys cul ea ciocnoreioehts 360 
ANG ES SRR apap el Aa i | 360 
PO LS OOe abe te at Ueki 5 
Aristeas, Letter of ........ 25 
Ascension of Isaiah, X-XI.. 224 


Assumption of Moses, X:10 45 
Baruch, sed hd i of, 


XXIX:5 niplpticiat one ete re 74 
XLIX:1- i. Fy Ee pee Pra 30, 396 
Ecclesiasticus 
at Liss) bsin ese Ree ees 43 
Dee TUOE eieak tpladaainy anew 26 
Enoch 
RVI ¢404s iced Ge 41 
Dada V hab 2h ate er etohe she HORE 267 
PUY IER VERB aks os eek 43 
MAVEUS eee aah baa keen 41 
RV Tee Os ia. pee 42. 
DV ELLE sas taversmietewe aote 42 
Bi Bali o Poe cia ater ae 45 
Dil ere ce Nea Ae ae 252 
BA EY aan ae ier ae 347 
DALE 218-14 sevens 42, 347 
ERT OTSA ai ee 347 
DU RO tet OR ee tO ae 42 
Per ee heen ie eet 44 
Enoch, Secrets of 
WLLL Vintineiy atatsia wees weer 388 
MLSE Se poea sis ih ec aaeee 343 
IV Esdras 
V EE One re 44 
PE Nar ees lca So tate ae Sere 43, 227 
I Maccabees 
Ei BG-Da) cdss ope ae + wean 58 
II Maccabees 
Vee Dy tS ai uh ae 396 
Lg be Per ere pee f 396 


InpEx To REFERENCES 


VIT:37-38 2... cee ews eees 241 
RLV ch Gleiicccechasinse Geen 396 
IV Maccabees 
E09 R 2 edavncessiogs bes eee oe 240 
Ve 2D  ccossslununncuemiekeeaane eee 241 
Ke VITA 2I 22s... aieipree Sew ees 240 
Sibylline Oracles 
LV :24-33,. 162-170 ....... 05 45 
EX POAT, cle sion 63 
Solomon (Pharisees), 
Psalms of 
P.O BS A, STP 360 
DOV TUS AG | cisspheiaccun ctor 396 
RV UU od clearest 43 
Solomon, Wisdom of 
ELS LOTS Pie Les siabetetouat te 43 
Testaments of the 
12 Patriarchs ........ 39, 64 
LBV MLV ES Sioaimacaien ates 44 
Issachar, V:2, VII:6.... 328 
Dan, PV 23. ioeacanukeeee 328 
Asher, (WULES is. decease ae 44 
Benjamin, IX:2 ........ 44 
Clementine Recognitions 
DBS S GO iis) eceyesonsveine eee 64 
Eusebius, Church fivstorg 
SO ited. a's u'o aa ata a en 53 
PEMD Ute sapsraledisis eyatoe cove 841 
sh es! Raion es Wear} pA 8 12 
WALILS Hida anni dealer ae 390 
Josephus, Antiquities 
ATT LO SG ys ainwe ley aa 
Tak Vise Sv ssiictan keane 34 
ALY iBi1-3. pec aee e beeen 28 
ee ViR BS EO scenes pupipter ee ae 276 
PV ELSBt 1, aso wiy oye Beene 275 
Xe Ved slilceay spas eee 35 
A VIEDEOT 3) sare eres ae 396 
TEX VELTGL 23) fo ves ties gee 30 
OV Ee th oe Sine gare ee 34 
AA ELL LS By 7%, uoshelm reek ake 35 
RV ATT 22: oo oe we kee aetee 374 
D958 98 he 1 | OU a a 374 
VT Be Be ala cate mat ayare 60, 276 
Ne Ba es a cian wl Be 46 
Josephus, War 
BE Bree a a's 3 ee Say GRD 
EE ED or Ree 396 
fF k eo : ame 30, 34, 396 
fU 2 PARR PEE AE Oe Co 335 


InpEx To REFERENCES 417 


ELD CO) ae Mire aie Fils erties 24 On the World, III....... 396 
BVLL SSS! Gretta ah aa oth aa 355 my 
Justin Martyr, Dialogue Natural History, V:17... 35 
MER VELL Goes aie Cette aed 235 PV ESEG OM aatnee win ecalehi ase . 320 
PERS V DEL bes alates eee tk 57 | Talmud 
PE a Le veieis = tix tate e ine 235 Agada der Galeatine 
NGG aes oH Ne OPP ERY fae spe 235 eneischen Amoraer, 
Jwenal, Satire ‘Die, Bacher, IIT;.616.... 32 re 
POV \ biateiael a tahtie e's »- 12, 110 Pirke Aboth, IT: Oe 
Piulo Tract Pesachim. . 395, 356, 357 
On the Virtues of Am- Teachings of the Twelve 
bassadors, P. 45....... 12 | Apostles 
On the Virtuous Man Be- VALLES As am Shen s Gamera ae 5s 107 


ing-Free, XII ........ 35 


Pate gor uae 
u * 44 i 
A RA An aN AAO 4 





GENERAL INDEX 


Abba Father, 367 

Abomination of desolation, 340 

Abrahams, I., 68, 111, 113, 277, 
325 

Alexander and Rufus, 385 

Andrew, 92, 99, 143 

Annas, High Priest, 374 

Anointing of Jesus at feast, 
350 f. 

Antioch, Matthew Gospel in, 16 

Antiochus Epiphanes, 29 

Apocalyptic literature, 24 

Aramaic Gospels, 8 

Aramaic expressions, 122, 135, 
367 

Aramaic, Son of Man in, 102f., 
113 


Bacher, Wilhelm, 325 

Baptism of proselytes, 63 

Barabbas, 381-2 

Barracks, Roman, in Jerusalem, 
28 


Bartimaeus, 294 f., 297 

Beatitudes, 170-2 

Beelzeboul, theory of the Scribes, 
118-20, 139, 189, 191, 313 

Bethany, 296, 310, 350, 379, 404 

Bethphage, 296 

Bethsaida, 148, 204, 209, 213 

Bi-lingual Palestine, 8 

Binding and loosing, 103, 231 f. 

Burning bush, 327 


Caesar, Julius, 28 

Caesar’s coin, 323-6 

Caesarea Philippi, 209, 222, 223, 
226 

Caiaphas, High Priest, 374, 376-8 

Capernaum, 92, 95, 99, 119, 148, 
207, 216, 273 

Captain of the Temple, 26, 312 

Charles, R. H., 24 


Chasidim, 29 f. 

Chorazin, 148 

Church, 175, 230-3 

Cleopas, 401 

Conder, C. R., 136 
Covenants, new and old, 359 f. 


Dalmanutha, 209, 216 
David and priests’ bread, 112 
and Psalm CX, 329 f, 
Death, Jesus dealing with, 132, 
135-7 


Death of Jesus, significance of, 
(See Suffering) 

Death, Messianic, in 
thought, 234 f. 

Decapolis (Ten City District), 
132, 209, 213 

Deissmann, Adolf, 214 

Demons, exorcism of, 83f., 87- 


Jewish 


90, 118-20, 129-32, 144, 
147f., 210-12, 259-63, 
269 f. 


Elder, quoted by Papias, 12 f. 

Eleazar and Izates, 46 

Elijah, 62, 142, 222, 223, 224, 
252 f., 258 f., 389 

Elisha, and the loaves, 203 f. 

and Naaman the Syrian, 142 

Emmaus, two disciples going to, 
401-3 

End of the age, 243-55, 337-48 

Eschatology of Jesus, 243-55, 
337-48 

Essenes, 34f., 61 


Faith, 86, 96, 100£., 128, 133-5, 


137, 158-60, 212, 260-2, 
304 f., 321 f. 

Fasting, 107-9 

Feeding multitudes, 198-207, 
214f ; 


419 


420 


Ferrar, W. J., 24 

Fig-tree withered, 320-2 

Food laws, 11 f., 121-3 

Forgiveness, 100f., 102 f., 
174-6, 322 

Future life, 305 f. 


123, 


Galatia, Jewish Christians in, 
. 
Galilee, 
Early home of Jesus, 53 f., 61 
Jesus’ public work in, 81-208 
Jesus leaves, 207f. 
Jesus’ brief return to, 216-18 
Jesus travels secretly through, 
264-75 
Gehenna, 272 
Gentiles in the Kingdom of God, 
Jewish view, 44-6 
Mark Gospel, 10-12 
Matthew Gospel, 14-16, 231 f. 
See in Palestine, 8, 29 f., 
3 
Gentiles of the synagogue, 45 f., 
, 212 
Gerasene demoniac, 
Gethsemane, 365-73 
Golgotha, 385 
Gospel, meaning of, 2 
Gospels, credibility of, 3-8 
Gospels, shaped by Christian 
teachers, 4-7 


129-32 


Healing, Jesus’, by prayer, 83-7, 
135, 213 
Jesus’ avoidance of, 92-5, 214 
Hebrews, Gospel according to, 

-113 f. 
Herod Antipas, 81, 115, 199, 210, 
218-20, 275 f., 323-6, 382 f. 
Herod the Great, 24, 51f. 
Herodians, 114f., 218f., 
323-6 
Holy Spirit, 86 f., 120, 147, 229, 


220, 


Biasbham’ against, 120 
Humility, disciples’ lack of, 
265-73, 280, 290 f. 


Idumaea, 116 


GenrraL INDEX 


Izates, the proselyte, 46 - 


Jackson and Lake, 62, 143 
James, brother of Jesus, 119 
James, of Zebedee, 92, 143, 290 f. 
Jeremiah, Jesus reincarnation 
of, 222, 224 
Jericho, 292-4 
Jesusalem, visits of Jesus to, 
52, 53 f., 81 f., 289, 298 
Jesus, 
Birth, 51f., 70 
Genealogies, 53 
At temple as a boy, 53 f. 
Life in Nazareth, 49-59 
Family, 55 f., 118 f., 138 
Carpenter, 56 f. 
Date beginning public life, 60 
Baptism, 65-69 
Temptation, 70-80 
Prophet and healer in Galilee, 
81-208 
Choosing disciples, 91 f., 117 f. 
Sending out disciples, 144-46 
Multitudes eating in brother- 
hood, 198-207 
Leaves Galilee, 207 f. 
In outland. 209-21 
Brief return to Galilee, 216-18 


Reveals . Messianic conscious- 
ness, 222-33 

Travels secretly through Gali- 
lee, 264-75 

In Peraea, resumes public 
work, 275-88 

To Jerusalem, 289-99 

Conflict with scribes and 


priests, 308-28 
Private teachings about end of 
the age, 337-48 
Last Supper, 355-64 
In Gethsemane, 365-70 
Betrayal and arrest, 
370-3 
Trial, 374-83. 
Execution, 384-90 
Burial, 393 f. 
Resurrection, 396-406 
Healings by, 
Bartimaeus, 294 f. 


350-4, 


GENERAL INDEX 421 


Jesus, Jesus, 
Healings by, Teachings of, 


Centurion’s servant, 95 f. 

Deaf stammerer, 213 f. 

Epileptic, 259-61 

Jairus’ daughter, 133, 135 f. 

Leper, 93-5 

Paralytic, 99 f. 

Simon’s mother-in-law, 86 

Ten lepers, 157 

Withered hand, 113 f. 

Woman bent over, 111 

Woman. with blood issue, 
133-5 

See Demons, exorcism of, 

Parables of, 

Drag net, °196 

Friend at midnight, 85, 178 

Good Samaritan, 177 

Growth of seed, 194 

Judgment scene, 346-8 

Laborers in the vineyard, 
57, 287 f. 

Leaven, 196 

Lost coin, 157 

Lost sheep, 157 

Lost son, 157f., 177 f. 

Marriage of king’s son, 
317-9 

Mustard seed, 195 

Pearl merchant, 196 

Pharisee and publican, 158 

Plant uprooted, 14 

Pounds, 250, 295 f., 344-7 

Rich fool, 181 

Rich man and Lazarus, 
182 f. 

Shrewd steward, 181 f. 

Sower, 190-3 

Strong man bound, 119 f. 

Talents, 344-7 

Tares, 196 f. 

Treasure in field, 196 

Two sons, 316 f. 

Unforgivingg servant, 176 

Unjust judge, 156 f. 

Virgins, 343 f. 

Wicked husbandman, 314-6 

Teachings of, 

Attention, 191-3 


Based on experience, 150 f. 
Basis of authority, 306 
Beatitudes, 170-2 ; 
Brotherhood, 166-83, NS 
254, 305 f. 
Central trends, 305 f. 
Children, 280 f. 
Divoree, 173, 276-9 
Faith in the Heavenly 
Father, 159 f. 
Forgiving, 174-6 
Friendly heart, 172 
Fulfilling law, 174 
Future life, 326 f. 
Golden Rule, 169 f. 
God a Father, 155, 165, 
200 f., 254, 305 f. 
Honest heart, 152 f. 
Humility, 265-73, 280, 290-2 
Lord’s prayer, 164 f. 
Love of neighbors, 166 f. 
Loving heart, 153-5 
Loyalty to Jesus, 183-5 
Lust, 173 
Money, 160f., 180-3, 282-5, 
336 
Paying debts, 173 
Prayer, 156 f., 178 
Repentance, 157 f. 
Revenge, 173 f. 
Righteous heart, 151 f. 
Self-denial, 168 
Servant of everyone, 167 f. 
Social courtesies, 178-80 
Sympathy, 177 
Thankfulness, 157 — 
Trusting the Heavenly 
Father, 158 f. 
Unostentatious righteousness 
162-4 
See Eschatology, Faith, 
Kingdom, Law, Suffering. 
Joanna, 398 
Johanan, Rabbi, 3 
John of Zebedee, 92, 143, 290 f. 
John the Baptist, 
Preaching and baptism of, 
60-3, 82 f. 


422 


John the Baptist, 
Disciples of, 63 f. 
Prediction of the Messiah, 64 f. 
Baptizes Jesus, 65 f. 
Recognition of Jesus’ Messiah- 
ship uncertain, 66f. 83 f. 
226 
Imprisonment and execution 
of, 81, 199 
Not a healer, 83 f. 
Jesus’ eulogy of, 247 f. 
Not in the Kingdom of 
Heaven, 247 f. 
Called Elijah, 259 
His spirit in Jesus, 222, 276 
Jesus questions Pharisees 
about, 313 f. 
John the Baptist sect, 63 f. 
Jonah, 217 
Joseph of Arimathaea, 393 f. 
Josephus, Works of, 23 
Judas, the Galilean, 35, 59-61, 
63, 79, 138, 141, 143, 
194f., 308 f. 


Judas Iscariot, 143 f., 220, 267, 


350-4 
Judgment of the Son of Man, 
347 f. 


Kingdom of God (Heaven) 
Jewish idea of, 38-48, 70, 
203 f., 266 f. 
Jesus’ idea of life in, 149-186, 
197, 268 f. 
Jesus’ idea of when and how it 
would come, 243-55, 337- 
48 
Korban, 122 


Law and synagogue, 27 
Law of Moses, Jesus’ view of, 


112, 131701794, 98 f., 
104 f., 109-14, 121-3, 174, 
197, 216f., 276-8, 282, 


318 f., 328, 333, 344 
Pharisees’ view of, 30-33 
Levi, 103-6, 143 
Logia of Matthew, 17 
Lord’s prayer, 164 f. 
Lord’s Supper, 201, 355-64 


GENERAL INDEX 


Lord’s naeens Not the passover, 
362 f. 


Love to God, 153-65, 328 
Love to men, 166-83, 328 
Loyalty to Jesus, 183-6 
Luke, 20 
Gospel of, 18-21 
Special teaching in the Gospel 
of, 177-86 


Maccabean martyrs, 
new age, 240f. 
Magadan, 216 
Magians, 52 
Mark, 12f., 377 f. 
Gospel of, 10-13 
Late ending of the Gospel of, 
399 f. 
Mary and Martha, 179 f. 
Marys at the empty. tomb, 398 
Matthew, 103-6, 143, 267 
Gospel of, 13-18 
Messiah from tribe of Levi, 64 
Messianic consciousness of Jesus, 
development of, 67 f., 
76f., 80, 88f., 96, 102, 
123 f., 204-6, 210, 217, 225- 
30, 233, 241 f., 253 f., 256 
294, 296-8, 300-7, 321 f., 
330 f., 339-48, 376-8 
Concealment of, 222-33, 240, 
' 204f., 296, 377 
Messianic hope, Jewish, 38-48, 65, 
70, 72, 224, 234, 307 
Of the Twelve, 266-8 
Montefiore, C. G., 122 
Moses at the Transfiguration, 
252 f. 
Megsianic _ prototype, 
203 f., 205, 207 
Mount of Olives, 338, 366 
Mysteries, 189 . 


Nain, Widow’s son, 136 
Nazareth, description of, 54 f. 
Jesus’ early life in, 50 
Jesus’ rejection in, 138-42 

Nazarite, 61 
Nicodemus, 82, 394 


Oesterley and Box, 356 


introduce 


72-4, 


GENERAL INDEX 


Papias, 12, 17 
Parables, Jesus’ reason for using, 
187-90 
Paradise, 388 
Passover, 355-8 
Paul, 1, 19 f., 22, 105, 120, 187 f 
212, 249f., 279, 318, 340, 
341, 361 f., 375 
Pella, 341 
Peraea, 275, 323 
Peter, 
Source of Mark, 12 f. 
Exalted in Matthew, 16 f. 
Called by Jesus, 92 
Mother-in-law cured, 86 
Walks on water, 206 
Confessor and rock man, 223, 
230-3, 235 f. 
With the keys, 232 f. 
Misunderstands prediction ot 
resurrection, 238 f. 
Denies Jesus, 378-80 
Peter Gospel, 388 
Pharisees, 
Origin of, 29f. 
Teaching of, 30-33, 98 f., 123-5, 
281 


Number and. influcnce of, 36 
Early conflicts with Jesus, 
98-125 
Asking for a sign, 216-20 
Combine with priests against 
Jesus, 308-29 
Denounced by Jesus, 329-36 
Philip, 143 
Pictures, Jewish dislike of, 324 f. 
Pilate, the procurator, 153, 380- 
4, 393 f. 
Pompey, 33 f. 
Post, G. E., 356 
Prayer, 84-86, 92f., 129, 135, 
156 f., 163-5, 178, 204f., 
213, 262f., 304, 321 f. 
Priests, 26, 28 f., 33 f., 220, 313- 
28, 386 f. 
Priests and_ scribes combine 
against Jesus, 308-28 
Prophets and teachers shaping 
Gospels, 4-7 
Publicans, 37, 103-105, 292-4 


423 
Quelle, Source document, 8 f., 17 
Rabbinic method of teaching, 
Raseaay, (We M., 51 


Resurrection, current Jewish 
ideas of, 30, 34, 326f., 
396 f. 


Jesus’ view of, 326 f. 
Jesus, expectation of his, 234, 
236-8, 265, 289 f. 
Nature of Jesus’, 396-8, 404-6 
Revelation, Book of, 5, 21 
Rich man discouraged, 281-3 
Righteousness in relation to God, 
150-165 
In relation to men, 166-183, 
282-8 
In the heart, 151-7 
Pharisees’ ideas of, 31, 101 f., 
104 f., 107f., 109-11, 118, 
121, 123 f., 281 
Romahs in Palestine, 28 
Rufus and Alexander, 385 


Sabbath, 109-115 . 
Saddouk, see Judas the Galilean. 
Sadducees, 
Origin and teaching, 33 f. 
Number of, 36 
Included chief priests, 308 
Resurrection debated with 
Jesus, 326-8 
Salome, 392, 398 
Satan, 72f., 76-9, 83, 118-20, 
126 f., 1383, 139, 147 
Schiirer, Emil, 325 
Scribes, 
Influence of, 27, 36, 98 f. 
Mainly Pharisees, 36, 308 
Against Jesus, 98-125, 313-36 
See Pharisees 
Scribes and Pharisees denounced 
by Jesus, 329-36 
Scribes and _ priests combine 
against Jesus, 308-28 
Sermon on the Mount, 150, 170 
Seventy sent out, 147 f. 
Sidon, 116, 123, 148, 209, 212 
Sign from heaven refused, 216-8 


424 


Siloam, 153 
Simon, Jesus’ cross-bearer, 385, 
389 


Simon “the Cananaean” or “the 
Zealot,” 143 
Sinners, 38 f. 
Jesus’ eating with, 103-6 
Smith, G. A., 54 f. 
Son of David, 40f., 117, 227, 
294, 329f., 340 
Son of God, 43, 66-68, 70-80, 123 
Son of Man, 41-43, 227, 238, 340 
Jesus the, 102 f., 113, 135, 227- 
30, 330 
Sources of the Gospels, 8 f. 
Stephen and the Law of Moses, 
14, 337 
Storm, Jesus, quieting, 127-9 
Strack and Billerbeck, 40 
Suffering of Jesus, Meaning of, 
236-42, 264, 268, 290-2, 
321 f., 352, 358-60, 366-9, 
383, 388 f., 390 f. 
Synagogue, Purpose of, 26-28, 82 
Ruler of, 27, 111 
Synoptic problem, 2, 8 f. 
Syro-Phoenician woman, 210-12 


Tacitus, 146 

Talmud, 3, 23f. 

Temple bazaar closed by Jesus, 
81, 310-12 


GenERAL INDEX 


Temple, Jewish, 24-26, 309 f. 

Temple tax, 273 f. 

Temple to be destroyed, 337-42 

Temptation of Jesus, 70-80, 217, 
225 f. 

Theophilus, 19 

Thief on cross, 387 f. 

Thompson, W. H., 190 

Tiberias, 381 

Timothy, 46 

Tradition of elders, 14, 31 f. 

Opposed by Jesus, 120-3, 216 
Transfiguration, 252 f., 256-9 
Trial of Jesus, 374-83 
Legality of, 378 

Tribute money, 322-6 

Triumphal entry, 296-9 

Twelve, selection of the, 117 f., 
143 f. 

Twelve sent out, 144-6 

Tyre, Jesus in, 123, 209, 211-12 


Virgin birth, 50f., 70 


Weber, Ferdinand, 110, 235 
Widow, poor but generous, 336 
Winsche, August, 356 . 


Zacchaeus, 292-4 
Zadok, see Saddouk 
Zealots, 35 f., 143 
Zechariah, 335 


ead 











ery 
AN) 


y ty 
‘ 


a ae 
, } tie 


ity Dn lod My 
Eagle VA MEA es 
iy 








st, OFT Mie § 
NW TN 
ne 


a, 











f ear 4 
ah 









Om ii 


